IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v40y2013i2p391-410.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Probabilistic spatial power indexes

Author

Listed:
  • Stefano Benati
  • Giuseppe Vittucci Marzetti

Abstract

In this study, we present a generalization of spatial power indexes able to overcome their main limitations, namely (i) the excessive concentration of power measures; (ii) the too high sensitivity to players’ location in the ideological space. Voters’ propensity to support an issue is modeled via a random utility function with two additive terms: the deterministic term accounts for voters’ preference-driven/predictable behavior; the random one is a catch-all term that accounts for all the idiosyncratic/unpredictable factors. The relative strength of the two terms gives rise to a continuum of cases ranging from the Shapley value, where all aggregation patterns are equally probable, to a standard spatial value, like the Owen–Shapley index, where instead the conditional order is fully deterministic. As an illustrative application, we analyze the distribution of power in the Council of Ministers under three different scenarios: (i) EU15 Pre-Nice; (ii) EU27 Nice Treaty; (iii) EU27 Lisbon Treaty. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Stefano Benati & Giuseppe Vittucci Marzetti, 2013. "Probabilistic spatial power indexes," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 391-410, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:40:y:2013:i:2:p:391-410
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-011-0608-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00355-011-0608-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-011-0608-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laruelle,Annick & Valenciano,Federico, 2011. "Voting and Collective Decision-Making," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521182638.
    2. McFadden, Daniel L., 1984. "Econometric analysis of qualitative response models," Handbook of Econometrics, in: Z. Griliches† & M. D. Intriligator (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 24, pages 1395-1457, Elsevier.
    3. Walker, Joan & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2002. "Generalized random utility model," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 303-343, July.
    4. Owen, G & Shapley, L S, 1989. "Optimal Location of Candidates in Ideological Space," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 18(3), pages 339-356.
    5. Philip Straffin, 1977. "Homogeneity, independence, and power indices," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 107-118, June.
    6. Einy, Ezra & Haimanko, Ori, 2011. "Characterization of the Shapley–Shubik power index without the efficiency axiom," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 615-621.
    7. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2006. "The Inter-Institutional Distribution of Power in EU Codecision," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(1), pages 129-154, August.
    8. 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.
    9. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2011. "Strategic versus non-strategic voting power in the EU Council of Ministers: the consultation procedure," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(3), pages 511-541, September.
    10. Barr, Jason & Passarelli, Francesco, 2009. "Who has the power in the EU?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 339-366, May.
    11. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgren, 2004. "Power Measurement as Sensitivity Analysis," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(4), pages 517-538, October.
    12. Pradeep Dubey & Abraham Neyman & Robert James Weber, 1981. "Value Theory Without Efficiency," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 122-128, February.
    13. Shapley, L. S. & Shubik, Martin, 1954. "A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 787-792, September.
    14. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2005. "The Possibility of a Preference-Based Power Index," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 377-387, July.
    15. Baldwin, Richard & Widgren, Mika, 2004. "Winners and Losers Under Various Dual Majority Rules for the EU Council of Ministers," CEPR Discussion Papers 4450, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Dan S Felsenthal & Moshé Machover, 2004. "Analysis of QM rules in the draft constitution for Europe proposed by the European Convention, 2003," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 23(1), pages 1-20, August.
    17. Sergiu Hart, 2006. "Shapley Value," Discussion Paper Series dp421, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    18. Francesco Passarelli & Jason Barr, 2007. "Preferences, the Agenda Setter, and the Distribution of Power in the EU," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(1), pages 41-60, January.
    19. Bernard Steunenberg & Dieter Schmidtchen & Christian Koboldt, 1999. "Strategic Power in the European Union," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 339-366, July.
    20. Monderer, Dov & Samet, Dov, 2002. "Variations on the shapley value," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 54, pages 2055-2076, Elsevier.
    21. Humphreys, Macartan & Laver, Michael, 2010. "Spatial Models, Cognitive Metrics, and Majority Rule Equilibria," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 11-30, January.
    22. Milyo, Jeffrey, 2000. "Logical Deficiencies in Spatial Models: A Constructive Critique," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 105(3-4), pages 273-289, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Di Giannatale, Paolo & Passarelli, Francesco, 2013. "Voting chances instead of voting weights," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 164-173.
    2. Tom Blockmans & Marie-Anne Guerry, 2015. "Probabilistic Spatial Power Indexes: The Impact of Issue Saliences and Distance Selection," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 675-697, July.
    3. Martin, Mathieu & Nganmeni, Zephirin & Tchantcho, Bertrand, 2017. "The Owen and Shapley spatial power indices: A comparison and a generalization," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 10-19.
    4. Arnold Cédrick SOH VOUTSA, 2020. "Deegan-Packel & Johnston spatial power indices and characterizations," THEMA Working Papers 2020-16, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    5. Stefano Benati & Giuseppe Vittucci Marzetti, 2021. "Voting power on a graph connected political space with an application to decision-making in the Council of the European Union," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(4), pages 733-761, November.
    6. Hans Peters & José M. Zarzuelo, 2017. "An axiomatic characterization of the Owen–Shapley spatial power index," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(2), pages 525-545, May.
    7. Arnold Cédrick SOH VOUTSA, 2021. "The Public Good spatial power index in political games," THEMA Working Papers 2021-01, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    8. Diego Varela & Javier Prado-Dominguez, 2012. "Negotiating the Lisbon Treaty: Redistribution, Efficiency and Power Indices," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 6(2), pages 107-124, July.
    9. Philip D. Grech, 2021. "Power in the Council of the EU: organizing theory, a new index, and Brexit," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 223-258, February.
    10. Qianqian Kong & Hans Peters, 2021. "An issue based power index," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(1), pages 23-38, March.
    11. Albizuri, M.J. & Goikoetxea, A., 2022. "Probabilistic Owen-Shapley spatial power indices," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 524-541.
    12. Benati, Stefano & Rizzi, Romeo & Tovey, Craig, 2015. "The complexity of power indexes with graph restricted coalitions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 53-63.
    13. M. J. Albizuri & A. Goikoetxea, 2021. "The Owen–Shapley Spatial Power Index in Three-Dimensional Space," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1027-1055, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Le Breton, Michel & Montero, Maria & Zaporozhets, Vera, 2012. "Voting power in the EU council of ministers and fair decision making in distributive politics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 159-173.
    2. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2011. "Strategic versus non-strategic voting power in the EU Council of Ministers: the consultation procedure," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(3), pages 511-541, September.
    3. Stefano Benati & Giuseppe Vittucci Marzetti, 2021. "Voting power on a graph connected political space with an application to decision-making in the Council of the European Union," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(4), pages 733-761, November.
    4. Di Giannatale, Paolo & Passarelli, Francesco, 2013. "Voting chances instead of voting weights," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 164-173.
    5. Le Breton, Michel & Montero, Maria & Zaporozhets, Vera, 2012. "Voting power in the EU council of ministers and fair decision making in distributive politics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 159-173.
    6. Widgrén, Mika, 2008. "The Impact of Council Voting Rules on EU Decision-Making," Discussion Papers 1162, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    7. Mika Widgrén, 2008. "The Impact of Council's Internal Decision-Making Rules on the Future EU," Discussion Papers 26, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    8. Jenny Helstroffer & Marie Obidzinski, 2014. "Codecision procedure biais: the European legislation game," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 29-46, August.
    9. Barr, Jason & Passarelli, Francesco, 2009. "Who has the power in the EU?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 339-366, May.
    10. Philip D. Grech, 2021. "Power in the Council of the EU: organizing theory, a new index, and Brexit," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 223-258, February.
    11. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2006. "The Inter-Institutional Distribution of Power in EU Codecision," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(1), pages 129-154, August.
    12. Widgren, Mika & Kauppi, Heikki, 2008. "Do Benevolent Aspects Have Room in Explaining EU Budget Receipts?," CEPR Discussion Papers 6778, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Zaporozhets, Vera, 2015. "Power Distribution in French River Basin Committees," TSE Working Papers 15-558, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    14. Matthias Weber, 2014. "Choosing Voting Systems behind the Veil of Ignorance: A Two-Tier Voting Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-042/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. Tom Blockmans & Marie-Anne Guerry, 2015. "Probabilistic Spatial Power Indexes: The Impact of Issue Saliences and Distance Selection," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 675-697, July.
    16. Serguei Kaniovski, 2008. "The exact bias of the Banzhaf measure of power when votes are neither equiprobable nor independent," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(2), pages 281-300, August.
    17. René Brink & Frank Steffen, 2012. "Axiomatizations of a positional power score and measure for hierarchies," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 757-787, June.
    18. M. J. Albizuri & A. Goikoetxea, 2021. "The Owen–Shapley Spatial Power Index in Three-Dimensional Space," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1027-1055, October.
    19. Nicola Maaser & Alexander Mayer, 2016. "Codecision in context: implications for the balance of power in the EU," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 213-237, January.
    20. Matthias Weber, 2014. "Solving the Inverse Power Problem in Two-Tier Voting Settings," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-019/I, Tinbergen Institute.

    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:spr:sochwe:v:40:y:2013:i:2:p:391-410. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.