IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/spmain/hal-00445624.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

De l'équilibre au chaos et retour: bilan méthodologique des recherches sur la règle de majorité

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre Salmon

    (LEG - Laboratoire d'Economie et de Gestion - UB - Université de Bourgogne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Alain Wolfelsperger

    (ECON - Département d'économie (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

D'après le modèle canonique qui est au coeur de la théorie "économique" (ou "des choix rationnels", comme préfèrent dire les politologues) appliquée à la politique (démocratique), il est, en général, impossible de parvenir à une décision déterminée en recourant à la règle de majorité dès que le sujet en cause comporte au moins deux aspects distincts. Ce problème, dit du déséquilibre ou de l'instabilité de l'équilibre ou, encore du "chaos", d'abord minimisé, a ensuite paru gravement menaçant quant aux chances de développement de l'ensemble de la théorie. Mais à l'inquiétude qu'il suscitait jusqu'aux années quatre-vingt a succédé récemment une sérénité retrouvée grâce à la construction de modèles admettant un équilibre sans pourtant que le problème, dans sa formulation initiale, ait été vraiment résolu. Cet article vise à présenter les grandes lignes de cet aller et retour théorique et à en présenter une interprétation méthodologique à la lumière de certains développements récents de la philosophie des sciences, notamment celui qui assigne à la recherche l'objectif d'identifier les principaux mécanismes à l'oeuvre dans les systèmes sociaux réels plutôt qu'à découvrir des lois empiriques universelles. / According to the canonical model situated at the heart of the " economic " - or, as the political scientists prefer to call it, rational-choice - theory of (democratic) politics, whenever the matter to be decided raises, or consists of, at least two distinct issues, it is generally impossible to reach a determinate decision by using the majority rule. This problem, referred to as that of disequilibrium, equilibrium instability, or even"chaos", was first underplayed and then deemed ominous to the point of seriously undermining the development prospects of the whole theory. However, more recently, the concern it was the source of until the 1980s has given way to a state of renewed confidence. What has allowed this to happe
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Pierre Salmon & Alain Wolfelsperger, 2001. "De l'équilibre au chaos et retour: bilan méthodologique des recherches sur la règle de majorité," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-00445624, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:spmain:hal-00445624
    DOI: 10.3917/rfsp.513.0331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology

    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:hal:spmain:hal-00445624. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Contact - Sciences Po Departement of Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.