IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bge/wpaper/973.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Deciding on what to Decide

Author

Listed:
  • Anke Gerber
  • Salvador BarberÃ

Abstract

We study two-stage collective decision-making procedures involving a voting body. In a first stage, part of the voters are in charge of deciding what issues will be debated and which ones will not be discussed and remain unsettled. In the second stage, the whole set of voters decides on the positions to be adopted regarding the issues that are in the agenda. Using a protocol-free equilibrium concept introduced by Dutta et al. (2004), we study the tension between two forces that the agenda-setters must weigh. One is the desire to include in the agenda those issues on which they could get society to adopt their preferred positions. The other is their fear that including some favorable issues might induce other agenda setters to add further issues to the agenda, on which the social position might not be favorable to their interests. Our analysis concentrates on societies that use two salient classes of voting procedures: sequential rules and voting by quota. For these rules we show that essentially any set of issues can be obtained as an equilibrium agenda. We also discover that the power of the chair to manipulate sequential rules may go as far as to be able to avoid certain issues to get to the floor. Moreover, limited changes in the preferences of the agenda setters may result in dramatic changes in the size and composition of agendas.

Suggested Citation

  • Anke Gerber & Salvador BarberÃ, 2017. "Deciding on what to Decide," Working Papers 973, Barcelona School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:973
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://bw.bse.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/973-file.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moulin, Herve, 1979. "Dominance Solvable Voting Schemes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(6), pages 1137-1151, November.
    2. Raphael Godefroy & Eduardo Perez‐Richet, 2013. "Choosing Choices: Agenda Selection With Uncertain Issues," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 221-253, January.
    3. Baron, David P. & Ferejohn, John A., 1989. "Bargaining in Legislatures," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(4), pages 1181-1206, December.
    4. Arieli, Itai & Aumann, Robert J., 2015. "The logic of backward induction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 443-464.
    5. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    6. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    7. B. D. Bernheim & S. N. Slavov, 2009. "A Solution Concept for Majority Rule in Dynamic Settings," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 33-62.
    8. , & , J., 2014. "Bargaining over an endogenous agenda," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(2), May.
    9. Timothy Besley & Stephen Coate, 1997. "An Economic Model of Representative Democracy," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(1), pages 85-114.
    10. John Duggan, 2006. "Endogenous Voting Agendas," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(3), pages 495-530, December.
    11. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/3mdje1f65o8qrqpapnmrhon2vm is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Vincent Anesi, 2006. "Committees with Farsighted Voters: A New Interpretation of Stable Sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(3), pages 595-610, December.
    13. McKelvey, Richard D, 1979. "General Conditions for Global Intransitivities in Formal Voting Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1085-1112, September.
    14. Barberà, Salvador & Gerber, Anke, 2017. "Sequential voting and agenda manipulation," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    15. Dutta, Bhaskar & Jackson, Matthew O. & Le Breton, Michel, 2002. "Voting by Successive Elimination and Strategic Candidacy," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 190-218, March.
    16. Dutta, Bhaskar & Jackson, Matthew O & Le Breton, Michel, 2001. "Strategic Candidacy and Voting Procedures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 1013-1037, July.
    17. Austen-Smith, David, 1987. "Sophisticated Sincerity: Voting Over Endogenous Agendas," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(4), pages 1323-1330, December.
    18. Elizabeth Penn, 2008. "A distributive N-amendment game with endogenous agenda formation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 201-213, July.
    19. ,, 2014. "Endogenous agenda formation processes with the one-deviation property," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), January.
    20. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/3mdje1f65o8qrqpapnmrhon2vm is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Miller, Nicholas R & Grofman, Bernard & Feld, Scott L, 1990. "Cycle Avoiding Trajectories, Strategic Agendas, and the Duality of Memory and Foresight: An Informal Exposition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 64(3), pages 265-277, March.
    22. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel & Luis Rayo, 2006. "The Power of the Last Word in Legislative Policy Making," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(5), pages 1161-1190, September.
    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. Hans Gersbach & Kremena Valkanova, 2024. "Voting with Random Proposers: Two Rounds May Suffice," Papers 2410.20476, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.

    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. Bhaskar Dutta & Matthew O. Jackson & Michel Le Breton, 2004. "Equilibrium agenda formation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 23(1), pages 21-57, August.
    2. Hannu Vartiainen, 2015. "Dynamic stable set as a tournament solution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(2), pages 309-327, September.
    3. Zapal, Jan, 2020. "Simple Markovian equilibria in dynamic spatial legislative bargaining," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    4. Gilat Levy & Ronnie Razin, 2009. "Gradualism in Dynamic Agenda Formation," STICERD - Theoretical Economics Paper Series 543, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    5. Apesteguia, Jose & Ballester, Miguel A. & Masatlioglu, Yusufcan, 2014. "A foundation for strategic agenda voting," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 91-99.
    6. B. D. Bernheim & S. N. Slavov, 2009. "A Solution Concept for Majority Rule in Dynamic Settings," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 33-62.
    7. Daniel Diermeier & Georgy Egorov & Konstantin Sonin, 2017. "Political Economy of Redistribution," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 851-870, May.
    8. Scott Moser & John W. Patty & Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2009. "The Structure of Heresthetical Power," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 139-159, April.
    9. Eraslan, H.Hulya & McLennan, Andrew, 2004. "Strategic candidacy for multivalued voting procedures," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 29-54, July.
    10. Hans Gersbach & Oriol Tejada, 2012. "Channeling the final Say in Politics," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 12/164, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    11. Anesi, Vincent & Duggan, John, 2018. "Existence and indeterminacy of markovian equilibria in dynamic bargaining games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    12. de Groot Ruiz, Adrian & Ramer, Roald & Schram, Arthur, 2016. "Formal versus informal legislative bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 1-17.
    13. Bandyopadhyay, Siddhartha & Oak, Mandar P., 2008. "Coalition governments in a model of parliamentary democracy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 554-561, September.
    14. Corchón, Luis C., 2008. "The theory of implementation : what did we learn?," UC3M Working papers. Economics we081207, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    15. P. Jean-Jacques Herings & Harold Houba, 2010. "The Condorcet Paradox Revisited," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-026/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Hans Gersbach & Kremena Valkanova, 2024. "Voting with Random Proposers: Two Rounds May Suffice," Papers 2410.20476, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    17. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-00564976 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Carmelo Rodríguez-Álvarez, 2006. "Candidate Stability and Voting Correspondences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(3), pages 545-570, December.
    19. Bag, Parimal Kanti & Sabourian, Hamid & Winter, Eyal, 2009. "Multi-stage voting, sequential elimination and Condorcet consistency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 1278-1299, May.
    20. Wagner, Alexander K. & Granic, Dura-Georg, 2017. "Tie-Breaking Power in Committees," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168187, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    21. Raphael Godefroy & Eduardo Perez‐Richet, 2013. "Choosing Choices: Agenda Selection With Uncertain Issues," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 221-253, January.

    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

    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:973. 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.