IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some Considerations About a Uunified System for the Voting Procedres of the European Union


  • Nicolae Barsan-Pipu
  • Ileana Tache

    () ("Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University)


The paper analyses the evolution of the decision making process within the EU and assesses the effectiveness of the European voting procedures in the context of current and potential future enlargement. Based on a simulation model, we discussed some different scenarios of the voting procedures’ results within the EU, both for the Council and the Parliament of the European Union. A special attention was paid to the evolution of the voting model in the interval 2009-2050. The paper evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of the different voting systems. We have emphasis all the positive effects of the Penrose square root rule. Despite the criticism formulated around the Penrose model, it remains the only valid model for an effective voting system in the main EU decision-making bodies.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolae Barsan-Pipu & Ileana Tache, 2009. "Some Considerations About a Uunified System for the Voting Procedres of the European Union," Knowledge Horizons - Economics, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 1(1), pages 110-131, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:khe:journl:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:110-131

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Moshé Machover & Dan S. Felsenthal, 2001. "The Treaty of Nice and qualified majority voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(3), pages 431-464.
    2. repec:kap:iaecre:v:15:y:2009:i:4:p:393-408 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Voting game; voting weight; voting power; Penrose square root rule; Council; Parliament;

    JEL classification:

    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
    • O52 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Europe


    Access and download statistics


    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:khe:journl:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:110-131. 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: (Adi Sava). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.