Brams, Steven J. and Kilgour, D. Marc (2010): Kingmakers and leaders in coalition formation.
Download (301kB) | Preview
Assume that players strictly rank each other as coalition partners. We propose a procedure whereby they “fall back” on their preferences, yielding internally compatible, or coherent, majority coalition(s), which we call fallback coalitions. If there is more than one fallback coalition, the players common to them, or kingmakers, determine which fallback coalition will form. The first player(s) acceptable to all other members of a fallback coalition are the leader(s) of that coalition.
The effects of different preference assumption--particularly, different kinds of single-peakedness--and of player weights on the number of coherent coalitions, their connectedness, and which players become kingmakers and leaders are investigated. The fallback procedure may be used (i) empirically to identify kingmakers and leaders or (ii) normatively to select them. We illustrate and test the model by applying it to coalition formation on the U.S. Supreme Court, 2005-2009, which shows the build-up over stages of a conservative coalition that prevailed in nearly half of the 5-4 decisions.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Kingmakers and leaders in coalition formation|
|Keywords:||coalition formation; fallback procedure; kingmakers; leaders; US Supreme Court|
|Subjects:||D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D72 - Political Processes: Rent-Seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D85 - Network Formation and Analysis: Theory
|Depositing User:||Steven J. Brams|
|Date Deposited:||17. May 2010 13:41|
|Last Modified:||28. Feb 2015 14:28|
Brams, Steven J. (2008). Mathematics and Democracy: Designing Better Voting and Fair Division Procedures. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Brams, Steven J., Michael A. Jones, and D. Marc Kilgour (2002). “Single-Peakedness and Disconnected Coalitions.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 14, no. 3 (July): 359-383.
Brams, Steven J., Michael A. Jones, and D. Marc Kilgour (2005). “Forming Stable Coalitions: The Process Matters.” Public Choice 125, nos. 1-2 (October): 67-94.
Brams, Steven J., and D. Marc Kilgour (2001). “Fallback Bargaining.” Group Decision and Negotiation 10, no. 4 (July): 287-316.
Edelman, Paul H., and Jim Chen (2007). “The Most Dangerous Justice Rides into the Sunset.” Constitutional Commentary 24, no. 1: 199-219.
Franz, Alexandra (2009). “Coalition Formation in the U.S. Supreme Court from 1969 to 2009.” Preprint, Department of Politics, New York University.
Liptak, Adam (2009). “Roberts Court Shifts Right, Tipped by Kennedy.” New York Times (June 30).
Martin, Andrew D., and Kevin M. Quinn (2002). “Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953-1999.” Political Analysis 10: 134-153.
Naurin, Daniel, and Helen Wallace (eds.) (2008). Unveiling the Council of the European Union: Games Governments Play in Brussels. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stearns, Maxwell L. (2008). “Standing at the Crossroads: The Roberts Court in Historical Perspective.” Notre Dame Law Review 83, no. 3 (May): 875-963.
Toobin, Jeffrey (2008). The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court. New York: Anchor.
Riker, William H. (1962). The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.