Social choice theory without Pareto: The pivotal voter approach
This paper extends the pivotal voter approach pioneered by Barberá [Barberá, S., 1980. Pivotal voters: A new proof of Arrow's Theorem. Economics Letters 6, 13-6; Barberá, S., 1983. Strategy-proofness and pivotal voters: A direct proof of the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem. International Economic Review 24, 413-7] to all social welfare functions satisfying independence of irrelevant alternatives. Arrow's Theorem, Wilson's Theorem, and the Muller-Satterthwaite Theorem are all immediate corollaries of the main result. It is further shown that a vanishingly small fraction of pairs of alternatives can be affected in the group preference ordering by multiple individuals, which generalizes each of the above theorems.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Muller, Eitan & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1977. "The equivalence of strong positive association and strategy-proofness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 412-418, April.
- Donald Campbell & Jerry Kelly, 2007. "Social welfare functions that satisfy Pareto, anonymity, and neutrality, but not independence of irrelevant alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(1), pages 69-82, July.
- Barbera, Salvador, 1983. "Strategy-Proofness and Pivotal Voters: A Direct Proof of the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 24(2), pages 413-417, June.
- John Geanakoplos, 2005. "Three brief proofs of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(1), pages 211-215, 07.
- Reny, Philip J., 2001. "Arrow's theorem and the Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem: a unified approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 99-105, January.
- Sen, Arunava, 2001. "Another direct proof of the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 381-385, March.
- Wilson, Robert, 1972. "Social choice theory without the Pareto Principle," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 478-486, December.
- Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:58:y:2009:i:2:p:251-255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.