IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bge/wpaper/1515.html

A Characterization of Black's Voting Rule

Author

Listed:
  • Salvador Barberà
  • Walter Bossert

Abstract

In his 1958 classic, The Theory of Committees and Elections, Duncan Black proposed the following lexicographic rule: for any set of feasible alternatives, and any pro- file of voters' goodness relations, choose the strong Condorcet winner if it exists, and select the set of Borda winners otherwise. We provide what we think is the first axiomatic characterization of this rule. We do so through the intermediary study of the generalized social welfare functions that underlie the rule's choices, and the use of axioms that emphasize what is common and what is different in the spirit of the amply debated proposals made by these two 18th-century authors.

Suggested Citation

  • Salvador Barberà & Walter Bossert, 2025. "A Characterization of Black's Voting Rule," Working Papers 1515, Barcelona School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:1515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://bw.bse.esgallapre3.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/1515-2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shmuel Nitzan & Ariel Rubinstein, 1981. "A further characterization of Borda ranking method," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 153-158, January.
    2. Duncan Black, 1976. "Partial justification of the Borda count," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Asaf D. M. Nitzan & Shmuel I. Nitzan, 2024. "Balancing democracy: majoritarianism versus expression of preference intensity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 200(1), pages 149-171, July.
    4. Barberà, Salvador & Bossert, Walter, 2023. "Opinion aggregation: Borda and Condorcet revisited," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    5. Salvador Barberà & Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2021. "Daunou’s voting rule and the lexicographic assignment of priorities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 259-289, February.
    6. Hansson, Bengt & Sahlquist, Henrik, 1976. "A proof technique for social choice with variable electorate," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 193-200, October.
    7. Eyal Baharad & Shmuel Nitzan, 2007. "The Costs of Implementing the Majority Principle: The Golden Voting Rule," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 31(1), pages 69-84, April.
    8. Eyal Baharad & Shmuel Nitzan, 2011. "Condorcet vs. Borda in light of a dual majoritarian approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 151-162, August.
    9. Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2021. "Group decisions from individual rankings: The Borda–Condorcet rule," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 757-765.
    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. Barberà, Salvador & Bossert, Walter, 2023. "Opinion aggregation: Borda and Condorcet revisited," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    2. Asaf D. M. Nitzan & Shmuel I. Nitzan, 2024. "Balancing democracy: majoritarianism versus expression of preference intensity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 200(1), pages 149-171, July.
    3. Antonio Villar, 2023. "Correction: The precedence function: a numerical evaluation method for multicriteria ranking problems," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 11(2), pages 221-221, October.
    4. Antonio Villar, 2025. "Old rockers: Borda and Condorcet revisited," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 13(1), pages 45-53, April.
    5. Takahiro Suzuki, 2025. "Aggregating Opinions on Sets of Alternatives: Characterization and Applications," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 273-295, April.
    6. Elise S. Brezis, 2023. "Regulating the Revolving Door of Regulators," Working Papers 2023-03, Bar-Ilan University, Department of Economics.
    7. Kelly, Jerry S. & Qi, Shaofang, 2019. "Balancedness of social choice correspondences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 59-67.
    8. László Csató, 2019. "An impossibility theorem for paired comparisons," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(2), pages 497-514, June.
    9. Antonio Villar, 2023. "Old rockers," Working Papers 23.10, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    10. Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2020. "Positionalist voting rules: a general definition and axiomatic characterizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(1), pages 85-116, June.
    11. Marchant, Thierry, 1998. "Cardinality and the borda score," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 464-472, July.
    12. Barberà, Salvador & Bossert, Walter & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2023. "Wine rankings and the Borda method," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 122-138, May.
    13. Shmuel I. Nitzan & Asaf D.M. Nitzan, 2023. "Balancing Democracy: Majoritarianism vs. Expression of Preference Intensity," Working Papers 2023-02, Bar-Ilan University, Department of Economics.
    14. Csató, László, 2013. "Rangsorolás páros összehasonlításokkal. Kiegészítések a felvételizői preferencia-sorrendek módszertanához [Paired comparisons ranking. A supplement to the methodology of application-based preferenc," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1333-1353.
    15. Ohseto, Shinji, 2007. "A characterization of the Borda rule in peer ratings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 147-151, September.
    16. Susumu Cato, 2011. "Pareto principles, positive responsiveness, and majority decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 503-518, October.
    17. Onur Doğan & Ayça Giritligil, 2014. "Implementing the Borda outcome via truncated scoring rules: a computational study," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 83-98, April.
    18. Eyal Baharad & Shmuel Nitzan, 2016. "Is majority consistency possible?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(2), pages 287-299, February.
    19. Daniela Bubboloni & Michele Gori, 2025. "A generalization to networks of Young’s characterization of the Borda rule," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 349(3), pages 1501-1552, June.
    20. Donald E. Campbell & Jerry S. Kelly, 2006. "Social Welfare Functions that Satisfy Pareto, Anonymity, and Neutrality, but not IIA," Working Papers 38, Economics Department, William & Mary.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bge:wpaper:1515. 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: Bruno Guallar (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bargses.html .

    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.