Comparing Generalized Median Voter Schemes According to their Manipulability
We propose a simple criterion to compare generalized median voter schemes according to their manipulability. We identify three necessary and sufficient conditions for the comparability of two generalized median voter schemes in terms of their vulnerability to manipulation. The three conditions are stated using the two associated families of monotonic fixed ballots and depend very much on the power each agent has to unilaterally change the outcomes of the two generalized median voter schemes. We perform a specific analysis of all median voter schemes, the anonymous subfamily of generalized median voter schemes.
|Date of creation:||Feb 2014|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +34 93 542-1222
Fax: +34 93 542-1223
Web page: http://www.barcelonagse.eu
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Berga, D & Serizawa, S, 1996.
"Maximal Domain for Strategy-Proof Rules with one Public Good,"
UFAE and IAE Working Papers
353.96, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
- Berga, Dolors & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2000. "Maximal Domain for Strategy-Proof Rules with One Public Good," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 39-61, January.
- Kalai, Ehud & Muller, Eitan, 1977.
"Characterization of domains admitting nondictatorial social welfare functions and nonmanipulable voting procedures,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 457-469, December.
- Ehud Kalai & Eitan Muller, 1977. "Characterization of Domains Admitting Nondictatorial Social Welfare Functions and Nonmanipulable Voting Procedures," Discussion Papers 234, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun SÃ¶nmez, 2013.
"School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 80-106, February.
- Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2011. "School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by their Vulnerability to Manipulation," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 784, Boston College Department of Economics.
- Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2011. "School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation," NBER Working Papers 16783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- H. Moulin, 1980. "On strategy-proofness and single peakedness," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 437-455, January.
- Kentaro Hatsumi & Dolors Berga & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2014.
"A maximal domain for strategy-proof and no-vetoer rules in the multi-object choice model,"
International Journal of Game Theory,
Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 153-168, February.
- Kentaro Hatsumi & Dolors Berga & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2011. "A maximal domain for strategy-proof and no-vetoer rules in the multi-object choice model," ISER Discussion Paper 0809, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University, revised Feb 2013.
- Barbera, Salvador & Masso, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 1997.
"Voting under Constraints,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 298-321, October.
- Serizawa Shigehiro, 1995. "Power of Voters and Domain of Preferences Where Voting by Committees Is Strategy-Proof," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 599-608, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:753. 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: (Bruno Guallar)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.