IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crb/wpaper/2025-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Most-concerning derelict objects in LEO Insights from social choice

Author

Listed:
  • Marc Deschamps

    (Université Marie et Louis Pasteur, CRESE, UR3190, F-25000 Besançon, France)

  • Annick Laruelle

    (Department of economic analysis (ANEKO), University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), E-48015 Bilbao, Spain)

  • June Silva

    (Department of economic analysis (ANEKO), University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), E-48015 Bilbao, Spain)

Abstract

Eleven teams of experts were solicitated to provide a ranked list of the 50 statistically-most-concerning objects in LEO. The approaches used by the experts and resulting lists are described in McKnight et al.(2021). An aggregation rule that leads to a collective list is also proposed. This paper offers a view from social choice theory on the aggregation process. We show that different aggregation rules may yield different conclusions concerning the most concerning object. We also discuss alternative aggregation rules, and provide some recommandations concerning the question that could be addressed to experts.

Suggested Citation

  • Marc Deschamps & Annick Laruelle & June Silva, 2025. "Most-concerning derelict objects in LEO Insights from social choice," Working Papers 2025-05, CRESE.
    • Handle: RePEc:crb:wpaper:2025-05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crese.univ-fcomte.fr/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/WP-2025-05.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kelly, Jerry S, 1974. "Voting Anomalies, the Number of Voters, and the Number of Alternatives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 42(2), pages 239-251, March.
    2. Annick Laruelle, 2021. "“Not This One”: Experimental Use of the Approval and Disapproval Ballot," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 15-28, December.
    3. Peter Emerson, 2013. "The original Borda count and partial voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 353-358, February.
    4. Laruelle, Annick, 2021. "Voting to select projects in participatory budgeting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 598-604.
    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. Béal, Sylvain & Deschamps, Marc & Diss, Mostapha & Tido Takeng, Rodrigue, 2025. "Cooperative games with diversity constraints," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    2. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Fernando Pérez-Rodríguez & José María Martín-Martín & João C. Azevedo, 2019. "Planning for Democracy in Protected Rural Areas: Application of a Voting Method in a Spanish-Portuguese Reserve," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    3. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/10286 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. William Gehrlein, 2002. "Condorcet's paradox and the likelihood of its occurrence: different perspectives on balanced preferences ," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 171-199, March.
    5. Hervé Crès, 2000. "Aggregation of Coarse Preferences," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-01064879, HAL.
    6. D. Marc Kilgour & Jean-Charles Grégoire & Angèle M. Foley, 2022. "Weighted scoring elections: is Borda best?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(2), pages 365-391, February.
    7. Güth, Werner & Vittoria Levati, M. & Montinari, Natalia, 2014. "Ranking alternatives by a fair bidding rule: A theoretical and experimental analysis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 206-221.
    8. P. Battiston & M. Magnani & D. Paolini & L. Rossi, 2024. "Country vs. Music: Strategic Incentives for Competing Voters," Economics Department Working Papers 2024-EP02, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    9. Hervé Crès, 2001. "Aggregation of coarse preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(3), pages 507-525.
    10. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/10286 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Rudiah Md Hanafiah & Nur Hazwani Karim & Noorul Shaiful Fitri Abdul Rahman & Saharuddin Abdul Hamid & Ahmed Maher Mohammed, 2022. "An Innovative Risk Matrix Model for Warehousing Productivity Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    12. Selim baha Yildiz & Abdelbari El khamlichi, 2017. "The Performance Ranking of Emerging Markets Islamic Indices Using Risk Adjusted Performance Measures," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(1), pages 63-78.
    13. Kevan W. Lamm & Alyssa Powell & Abigail Borron & Keith Atkins & Stephanie Hollifield, 2022. "Insights into Rural Stress: Using the Community Capitals Framework to Help Inform Rural Policies and Interventions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-12, May.
    14. William Gehrlein & Peter Fishburn, 1976. "Condorcet's paradox and anonymous preference profiles," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, June.
    15. Neal D. Hulkower & John Neatrour, 2019. "The Power of None," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, March.
    16. Da Col, Giacomo & Teppan, Erich C., 2022. "Industrial-size job shop scheduling with constraint programming," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    17. Laruelle, Annick, 2021. "Voting to select projects in participatory budgeting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 598-604.
    18. Balasko, Yves & Cres, Herve, 1997. "The Probability of Condorcet Cycles and Super Majority Rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 237-270, August.
    19. Andrew C. Eggers, 2021. "A diagram for analyzing ordinal voting systems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(1), pages 143-171, January.
    20. Egli, Florian, 2020. "Renewable energy investment risk: An investigation of changes over time and the underlying drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    21. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10273 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Shmuel Nitzan, 1985. "The vulnerability of point-voting schemes to preference variation and strategic manipulation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 349-370, January.
    23. Beikverdi, Majid & Tehrani, Nasim Ghanbar & Shahanaghi, Kamran, 2024. "A Bi-level model for district-fairness participatory budgeting: Decomposition methods and application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 314(1), pages 340-362.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:crb:wpaper:2025-05. 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: Laurent Kondratuk (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crufcfr.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.