IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v65y2025i2d10.1007_s00355-024-01575-6.html

Weak pairwise justifiability as a common root of Arrow’s and the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorems

Author

Listed:
  • Salvador Barberà

    (MOVE, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
    Barcelona SE)

  • Dolors Berga

    (Universitat de Girona)

  • Bernardo Moreno

    (Universidad de Málaga)

  • Antonio Nicolò

    (University of Padova
    University of Manchester)

Abstract

We introduce a novel principle that we call weak pairwise justifiability, which applies to a large class of collective choice rules, including the social choice functions and the social welfare functions about which the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem and Arrow’s impossibility theorem are predicated, respectively. We prove that, under appropriate qualifications, our principle is a common root for these two classical results, when applied to rules defined over the full domain of weak preference orders (also for strict).

Suggested Citation

  • Salvador Barberà & Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno & Antonio Nicolò, 2025. "Weak pairwise justifiability as a common root of Arrow’s and the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 65(2), pages 309-333, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:65:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s00355-024-01575-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-024-01575-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-024-01575-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-024-01575-6?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Priscilla Man & Shino Takayama, 2013. "A unifying impossibility theorem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(2), pages 249-271, October.
    2. Sen, Amartya & Pattanaik, Prasanta K., 1969. "Necessary and sufficient conditions for rational choice under majority decision," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 178-202, August.
    3. 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.
    4. Le Breton, Michel & Weymark, John A., 2011. "Chapter Seventeen - Arrovian Social Choice Theory on Economic Domains," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 191-299, Elsevier.
    5. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
    6. Elchanan Mossel & Omer Tamuz, 2012. "Complete characterization of functions satisfying the conditions of Arrow’s theorem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(1), pages 127-140, June.
    7. Eric Maskin, 1999. "Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(1), pages 23-38.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bernardo Moreno & Antonio Nicolò & Dolors Berga & Salvador Barberà, 2021. "Pairwise Justifiable Changes in Collective Choices," Working Papers 1256, Barcelona School of Economics.
    2. Ning Neil Yu, 2013. "A one-shot proof of Arrow’s theorem and the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(2), pages 145-149, November.
    3. Cato, Susumu, 2011. "Maskin monotonicity and infinite individuals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 56-59, January.
    4. Maskin, Eric & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2002. "Implementation theory," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare,in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 237-288 Elsevier.
    5. Diss, Mostapha & Doghmi, Ahmed & Tlidi, Abdelmonaim, 2016. "Strategy proofness and unanimity in many-to-one matching markets," MPRA Paper 75927, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Dec 2016.
    6. Barberà, Salvador & Berga, Dolors & Moreno, Bernardo, 2012. "Two necessary conditions for strategy-proofness: On what domains are they also sufficient?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 490-509.
    7. Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2009. "Strategic requirements with indifference: single-peaked versus single-plateaued preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(2), pages 275-298, February.
    8. Uuganbaatar Ninjbat, 2015. "Impossibility theorems are modified and unified," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 849-866, December.
    9. Joseph Root & David S. Ahn, 2020. "Incentives and Efficiency in Constrained Allocation Mechanisms," Papers 2006.06776, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2025.
    10. Bochet, Olivier & Sakai, Toyotaka, 2007. "Strategic manipulations of multi-valued solutions in economies with indivisibilities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 53-68, January.
    11. Pierre Bernhard & Marc Deschamps, 2018. "Arrow’s (im)possibility theorem," Post-Print hal-01941037, HAL.
    12. Cato, Susumu, 2009. "Another induction proof of the Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 239-241, December.
    13. Kutlu, Levent, 2009. "A dictatorial domain for monotone social choice functions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 14-16, October.
    14. Felix Brandt, 2015. "Set-monotonicity implies Kelly-strategyproofness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 793-804, December.
    15. Umut Keskin & M. Remzi Sanver & H. Berkay Tosunlu, 2021. "Recovering non-monotonicity problems of voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(1), pages 125-141, January.
    16. Matthew O. Jackson, 2001. "A crash course in implementation theory," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(4), pages 655-708.
    17. Artemov, Georgy, 2014. "An impossibility result for virtual implementation with status quo," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 380-385.
    18. Antonio Quesada, 2002. "From social choice functions to dictatorial social welfare functions," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(16), pages 1-7.
    19. Ning Yu, 2015. "A quest for fundamental theorems of social choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 533-548, March.
    20. Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2015. "Arrow’s Theorem and its descendants," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 14, pages 237-262, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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:65:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s00355-024-01575-6. 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.