表决权、议程控制和信息汇总

IF 3.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Laurent Bouton, Aniol Llorente-Saguer, Antonin Macé, Dimitrios Xefteris
{"title":"表决权、议程控制和信息汇总","authors":"Laurent Bouton, Aniol Llorente-Saguer, Antonin Macé, Dimitrios Xefteris","doi":"10.1093/jeea/jvae035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the comparative properties of voting rules based on the richness of their ballot spaces, assuming a given distribution of voting rights. We focus on how well voting rules aggregate the information dispersed among voters. We consider how different voting rules affect both voters’ decisions at the voting stage and the incentives of the agenda-setter who decides whether to put the proposal to a vote. Without agenda-setter, the voting efficiency of rules is higher when their ballot space is richer. Moreover, full-information efficiency requires full divisibility of the votes. In the presence of an agenda-setter, we uncover a novel trade-off: in some cases, rules with high voting efficiency provide worse incentives to the agenda-setter to select good proposals. This negative effect can be large enough to wash out the higher voting efficiency of even the most efficient rules.","PeriodicalId":48297,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the European Economic Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Voting Rights, Agenda Control and Information Aggregation\",\"authors\":\"Laurent Bouton, Aniol Llorente-Saguer, Antonin Macé, Dimitrios Xefteris\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jeea/jvae035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines the comparative properties of voting rules based on the richness of their ballot spaces, assuming a given distribution of voting rights. We focus on how well voting rules aggregate the information dispersed among voters. We consider how different voting rules affect both voters’ decisions at the voting stage and the incentives of the agenda-setter who decides whether to put the proposal to a vote. Without agenda-setter, the voting efficiency of rules is higher when their ballot space is richer. Moreover, full-information efficiency requires full divisibility of the votes. In the presence of an agenda-setter, we uncover a novel trade-off: in some cases, rules with high voting efficiency provide worse incentives to the agenda-setter to select good proposals. This negative effect can be large enough to wash out the higher voting efficiency of even the most efficient rules.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the European Economic Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the European Economic Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvae035\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the European Economic Association","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvae035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文假定投票权分布一定,根据投票空间的丰富程度研究投票规则的比较特性。我们重点关注投票规则对分散在选民中的信息的聚合程度。我们考虑不同的投票规则如何影响投票人在投票阶段的决定,以及决定是否将提案付诸表决的议程制定者的积极性。在没有议程设置者的情况下,当投票空间更丰富时,规则的投票效率更高。此外,全信息效率要求选票完全可分。在有议程设置者的情况下,我们发现了一种新的权衡:在某些情况下,投票效率高的规则会激励议程设置者选择好的提案。这种负面影响可能大到足以冲抵即使是效率最高的规则的较高投票效率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Voting Rights, Agenda Control and Information Aggregation
This paper examines the comparative properties of voting rules based on the richness of their ballot spaces, assuming a given distribution of voting rights. We focus on how well voting rules aggregate the information dispersed among voters. We consider how different voting rules affect both voters’ decisions at the voting stage and the incentives of the agenda-setter who decides whether to put the proposal to a vote. Without agenda-setter, the voting efficiency of rules is higher when their ballot space is richer. Moreover, full-information efficiency requires full divisibility of the votes. In the presence of an agenda-setter, we uncover a novel trade-off: in some cases, rules with high voting efficiency provide worse incentives to the agenda-setter to select good proposals. This negative effect can be large enough to wash out the higher voting efficiency of even the most efficient rules.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Journal of the European Economic Association replaces the European Economic Review as the official journal of the association. JEEA publishes articles of the highest scientific quality and is an outlet for theoretical and empirical work with global relevance. The journal is committed to promoting the ambitions of the EEA: the development and application of economics as a science, as well as the communication and exchange between teachers, researchers and students in economics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信