IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jetheo/v72y1997i1p148-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Copeland Method II: Manipulation, Monotonicity, and Paradoxes

Author

Listed:
  • Merlin, Vincent R.
  • Saari, Donald G.

Abstract

An important issue for economics and the decision sciences is to understand why allocation and decision procedures are plagued by manipulative and paradoxical behavior once there are n>3 or n=3 alternatives. Valuable insight is obtained by exploiting the relative simplicity of the widely used Copeland method (CM). By use of a geometric approach, we characterize all CM manipulation, monotonicity, consistency, and involvement properties while identifying which profiles are susceptible to these difficulties. For instance, we show that for n=3 candidates that the CM reduces the negative aspects of the Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Merlin, Vincent R. & Saari, Donald G., 1997. "Copeland Method II: Manipulation, Monotonicity, and Paradoxes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 148-172, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:72:y:1997:i:1:p:148-172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022-0531(96)92205-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laslier, Jean-Francois, 1996. "Rank-based choice correspondences," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 279-286, September.
    2. Vincent Merlin & Jörg Naeve, 2000. "Implementation of Social Choice Functions via Demanding Equilibria," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 191/2000, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany, revised 25 Sep 2001.
    3. Channing Arndt & Azhar M. Hussain & Vincenzo Salvucci & Finn Tarp & Lars Peter Østerdal, 2016. "Poverty Mapping Based on First‐Order Dominance with an Example from Mozambique," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 3-21, January.
    4. Christian Klamler, 2005. "On the Closeness Aspect of Three Voting Rules: Borda – Copeland – Maximin," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 233-240, May.
    5. Xiang He & Yongbo Yuan, 2019. "A Framework of Identifying Critical Water Distribution Pipelines from Recovery Resilience," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(11), pages 3691-3706, September.
    6. Channing Arndt & Azhar M. Hussain & Vincenzo Salvucci & Finn Tarp & Lars Peter Østerdal, 2016. "Poverty Mapping Based on First‐Order Dominance with an Example from Mozambique," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 3-21, January.
    7. Fujun Hou, 2024. "A new social welfare function with a number of desirable properties," Papers 2403.16373, arXiv.org.
    8. Saari, Donald G., 1999. "Explaining All Three-Alternative Voting Outcomes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 313-355, August.
    9. Michael Ackerman & Sul-Young Choi & Peter Coughlin & Eric Gottlieb & Japheth Wood, 2013. "Elections with partially ordered preferences," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(1), pages 145-168, October.
    10. M. Sanver & William Zwicker, 2009. "One-way monotonicity as a form of strategy-proofness," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 38(4), pages 553-574, November.
    11. Josep Colomer, 2013. "Ramon Llull: from ‘Ars electionis’ to social choice theory," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 317-328, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:72:y:1997:i:1:p:148-172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622869 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.