(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Arrow’s decisive coalitions
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v54y2020i2d10.1007_s00355-018-1163-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Arrow’s decisive coalitions

Author

Listed:
  • Wesley H. Holliday

    (University of California)

  • Eric Pacuit

    (University of Maryland)

Abstract

In his classic monograph, Social Choice and Individual Values, Arrow introduced the notion of a decisive coalition of voters as part of his mathematical framework for social choice theory. The subsequent literature on Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem has shown the importance for social choice theory of reasoning about coalitions of voters with different grades of decisiveness. The goal of this paper is a fine-grained analysis of reasoning about decisive coalitions, formalizing how the concept of a decisive coalition gives rise to a social choice theoretic language and logic all of its own. We show that given Arrow’s axioms of the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives and Universal Domain, rationality postulates for social preference correspond to strong axioms about decisive coalitions. We demonstrate this correspondence with results of a kind familiar in economics—representation theorems—as well as results of a kind coming from mathematical logic—completeness theorems. We present a complete logic for reasoning about decisive coalitions, along with formal proofs of Arrow’s and Wilson’s theorems. In addition, we prove the correctness of an algorithm for calculating, given any social rationality postulate of a certain form in the language of binary preference, the corresponding axiom in the language of decisive coalitions. These results suggest for social choice theory new perspectives and tools from logic.

Suggested Citation

  • Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2020. "Arrow’s decisive coalitions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 463-505, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:54:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s00355-018-1163-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-018-1163-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-018-1163-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-018-1163-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maurice Salles, 2017. "On Quine on Arrow," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 877-886, April.
    2. Blau, Julian H., 1979. "Semiorders and collective choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 195-206, August.
    3. Sen, Amartya Kumar, 1970. "The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal," Scholarly Articles 3612779, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    4. Sen, Amartya, 1970. "The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(1), pages 152-157, Jan.-Feb..
    5. Amartya Sen, 1969. "Quasi-Transitivity, Rational Choice and Collective Decisions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 36(3), pages 381-393.
    6. John Weymark, 1984. "Arrow's theorem with social quasi-orderings," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 235-246, January.
    7. Patty,John W. & Penn,Elizabeth Maggie, 2014. "Social Choice and Legitimacy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521191012, October.
    8. Andreu Mas-Colell & Hugo Sonnenschein, 1972. "General Possibility Theorems for Group Decisions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 39(2), pages 185-192.
    9. Ning Yu, 2012. "A one-shot proof of Arrow’s impossibility theorem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(2), pages 523-525, June.
    10. Kirman, Alan P. & Sondermann, Dieter, 1972. "Arrow's theorem, many agents, and invisible dictators," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 267-277, October.
    11. Allan Gibbard, 2014. "Intransitive social indifference and the Arrow dilemma," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 18(1), pages 3-10, March.
    12. List, Christian & Polak, Ben, 2010. "Introduction to judgment aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 441-466, March.
    13. Hammond, Peter J, 1976. "Equity, Arrow's Conditions, and Rawls' Difference Principle," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(4), pages 793-804, July.
    14. Herzberg, Frederik & Eckert, Daniel, 2012. "The model-theoretic approach to aggregation: Impossibility results for finite and infinite electorates," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 41-47.
    15. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    16. Lauwers, Luc & Van Liedekerke, Luc, 1995. "Ultraproducts and aggregation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 217-237.
    17. Marc Fleurbaey & Philippe Mongin, 2005. "The news of the death of welfare economics is greatly exaggerated," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(2), pages 381-418, December.
    18. Saari,Donald G., 2008. "Disposing Dictators, Demystifying Voting Paradoxes," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521516051, October.
    19. Blair, Douglas H. & Bordes, Georges & Kelly, Jerry S. & Suzumura, Kotaro, 1976. "Impossibility theorems without collective rationality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 361-379, December.
    20. Reny, Philip J., 2001. "Arrow's theorem and the Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem: a unified approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 99-105, January.
    21. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1984. "The Single Profile Analogues to Multi Profile Theorems: Mathematical Logic's Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 25(3), pages 719-730, October.
    22. Blair, Douglas H. & Pollak, Robert A., 1979. "Collective rationality and dictatorship: The scope of the arrow theorem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 186-194, August.
    23. Ehud Kalai & Eitan Muller & Mark Satterthwaite, 1979. "Social welfare functions when preferences are convex, strictly monotonic, and continuous," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 87-97, March.
    24. Saari,Donald G., 2008. "Disposing Dictators, Demystifying Voting Paradoxes," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521731607, October.
    25. James M. Buchanan, 1954. "Social Choice, Democracy, and Free Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(2), pages 114-114.
    26. Wilson, Robert, 1972. "Social choice theory without the Pareto Principle," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 478-486, December.
    27. Sen, Amartya K, 1979. "Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What's Wrong with Welfare Economics?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 89(355), pages 537-558, September.
    28. Bengt Hansson, 1976. "The existence of group preference functions," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 89-98, December.
    29. Campbell, Donald E. & Kelly, Jerry S., 2002. "Impossibility theorems in the arrovian framework," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 35-94, Elsevier.
    30. Guha, Ashok, 1972. "Neutrality, Monotonicity, and the Right of Veto," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 40(5), pages 821-826, September.
    31. Dryzek, John S. & List, Christian, 2003. "Social Choice Theory and Deliberative Democracy: A Reconciliation," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 1-28, January.
    32. Patty,John W. & Penn,Elizabeth Maggie, 2014. "Social Choice and Legitimacy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521138338, October.
    33. Rubinstein, Ariel & Fishburn, Peter C., 1986. "Algebraic aggregation theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 63-77, February.
    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. Susumu Cato, 2018. "Collective rationality and decisiveness coherence," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(2), pages 305-328, February.
    2. Susumu Cato, 2010. "Brief proofs of Arrovian impossibility theorems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(2), pages 267-284, July.
    3. Susumu Cato, 2012. "Social choice without the Pareto principle: a comprehensive analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(4), pages 869-889, October.
    4. Kotaro Suzumura, 2002. "Introduction to social choice and welfare," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 442, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    5. Susumu Cato, 2013. "Social choice, the strong Pareto principle, and conditional decisiveness," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 563-579, October.
    6. Susumu Cato, 2015. "Weak Independence and Social Semi-Orders," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 311-321, September.
    7. Stefano Vannucci, 2022. "Agenda manipulation-proofness, stalemates, and redundant elicitation in preference aggregation. Exposing the bright side of Arrow's theorem," Papers 2210.03200, arXiv.org.
    8. Kui Ou-Yang, 2018. "Generalized rawlsianism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(2), pages 265-279, February.
    9. Cato, Susumu, 2018. "Incomplete decision-making and Arrow’s impossibility theorem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 58-64.
    10. Susumu Cato, 2016. "Weak independence and the Pareto principle," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 295-314, August.
    11. John W. Patty & Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2019. "A defense of Arrow’s independence of irrelevant alternatives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 145-164, April.
    12. Cato, Susumu, 2017. "Unanimity, anonymity, and infinite population," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 28-35.
    13. Wesley H. Holliday & Mikayla Kelley, 2020. "A note on Murakami’s theorems and incomplete social choice without the Pareto principle," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(2), pages 243-253, August.
    14. Bossert, Walter & Suzumura, Kotaro, 2012. "Product filters, acyclicity and Suzumura consistency," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 258-262.
    15. Susumu Cato, 2013. "Quasi-decisiveness, quasi-ultrafilter, and social quasi-orderings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(1), pages 169-202, June.
    16. Antonio Quesada, 2002. "Power of Enforcement and Dictatorship," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 381-387, June.
    17. Herzberg, Frederik & Eckert, Daniel, 2012. "The model-theoretic approach to aggregation: Impossibility results for finite and infinite electorates," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 41-47.
    18. John A Weymark, 2012. "Social Welfare Functions," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers vuecon-sub-13-00018, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    19. Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2012. "Quasi-transitive and Suzumura consistent relations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 323-334, July.
    20. Frederik S. Herzberg, 2013. "The (im)possibility of collective risk measurement: Arrovian aggregation of variational preferences," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(1), pages 69-92, May.

    More about this item

    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:spr:sochwe:v:54:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s00355-018-1163-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.