Political Economy and Social Welfare with Voting Procedure

Islam, Jamal and Mohajan, Haradhan and Moolio, Pahlaj (2009): Political Economy and Social Welfare with Voting Procedure. Published in: KASBIT Business Journal , Vol. 2, No. 2 (31 December 2009): pp. 42-66.

Abstract

Mathematical Economics, Social Science and Political Science are inter-related. In this paper, an attempt has been made to describe aspects of these subjects by introducing examples, definitions, mathematical calculations and discussions. Game Theory is included in this paper to study mathematical models in economics and political science especially to study Nash equilibrium. Success and failure of democracy are interpreted as different equilibria of a dynamic political game with cost of changing leadership. Unitary democracy can be frustrated when voters do not replace corrupt leaders. Federal democracy cannot be consistently frustrated at both national and provincial levels. Arrow’s theorem indicates that the aggregate of individuals’ preferences will not satisfy transitivity, indifference to irrelevant alternatives and non-dictatorship, simultaneously to enable one of the individuals becomes a dictator. In this paper both social welfare functions and social choice correspondence are considered in economical environments.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Preference Relation; Pure and Mixed Strategies; Nash Equilibrium; Social Choice; Unitary and Federal Democracy.
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory

References

Arrow, K.J. 1951. Social Choice and Individual Values, 1st Ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Arrow, K.J. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd Ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Barbera, S. 1980. Pivotal Voters: A New Proof of Arrow’s Theorem. Economics Letter, 6(1): 13-16.

Barbera, S. 2001. An Introduction to Strategy-Proof Social Choice Function: Social Choice Welfare, 18: 619-953.

Barbera, S., Berga, D. and Moreno, B. 2009. Individual versus Group Strategy-Proofness: When do they Coincide? Barcelona Economics Working Paper series. Working paper No. 372:1-31

Barbera, S. and Coelho, D. 2009. On the Rules of k Names. Barcelona Economics Working Paper series. Working paper No. 264:1-40.

Barbera, S. and Moreno, B. 2008. Top Monotonicity: A Weak Domain Restriction Encompassing Single Peakedness, Single Crossing and Order Restriction. Barcelona Economics Working Paper No. 297:1-22.

Black, D. 1948. On the Rational of Group Decision Making, Journal of Political Economy, 56: 23-34.

Black, D. 1958. The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Blackorby, C., W. Bossert, and D. Donaldson. 2002. Utilitarianism and the Theory of Justice, In: K. J Arrow,

A, Sen, and K. Suzumura, (ed). Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, volume,1:543-596. Amsterdam: Elsevier,

Blackorby, C., Donaldson, D. and Weymark, J. 1990. A Welfarist Proof of Arrow’s Theorem. Researches Economique de Louvain, 56(3-4): 259-286.

Bossert, W. and Weymark, J. 2003. Utility in Social Choice, In: Handbook of Utility Theory, Vol-2, Extensions. S.Barbera, P. Hammond, and C. Seidl (Eds.). 2003. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Forthcoming.

Bossert W., J.A. Weymark. 2000. Utility in Social Choice.In: S. Barberà, P. Hammond, and C. Seidl (eds.). Handbook of Utility Theory, vol. 2, Dordrecht: Kluwer

Brams S., P. Fishburn. 1978. Approval voting. The American Political Science Review, 72: 831-847

Breton, Le M. and J. Weymark. 2006. Arrovian Social Choice Theory on Economics Domains. In: K.J.

Arrow, A. K. Sen, and K.A. Suzumura. Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Volume, 2, North Holland: Amsterdam.

Ehlers, L. and T. Storcken. 2007. Arrow’s Theorem for One-Dimensional Single-Peaked Preference. Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organizations. University of Maastricht.

Feldman, M.A. 1974. A Very Unsubtle Version of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem, Economic Inquiry, V-XII (4): 534-546.

Feldman, M.A. and R. Serrano. 2006. Welfare Economics and Social Choice Theory, 2nd ed.. New York: Springer.

Feldman, M.A. and R. Serrano. 2007. Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem: Preference Diversity in a Single- Profile World. Working Paper No. 2007-12, Brown University: Department of Economics.

Feldman, M.A. and R. Serrano. 2008. Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem: Two Simple Single-Profile Version. Working Paper, 2008-8. Brown University: Department of Economics.

Fudenberg, D. and J. Tirole. 1991. Game Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press. Geonokoplos, J. 2005. The Three Brief Proof of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem. Economic Theory, 26(1): 211-215.

Gibbard, A. 1973. Manipulation of Voting Rules: A General Result. Econometrica, 41: 587-601.

Gibbard, A. 1978. Straightforwardness of Game Forms with Lotteries as Outcomes. Econometrica, 46: 595 641.

Hardin, R. 1989. Why a Constitution. In: The Federalist Papers and the New Institutionalism. Bernard Grofman and Donald Wittman, (Eds). 1989. NY: Agathon Press.

Harsanyi, J.C. 1973. Games with Randomly Distributed Payoffs: A New Rationale for Mixed-Strategy Equilibria. International Journal of Game Theory, 2: 1-23.

Islam, J.N. 1997. Aspects of Mathematical Economics and Social Choice Theory. Proceedings of the Second Chittagong Conference on Mathematical Economics and its Relevance for Development (Ed.) J.N. Islam. Chittagong, Bangladesh: University of Chittagong.

Islam, J.N. 2008. An Introduction to Mathematical Economics and Social Choice Theory. Book to Appear.

Islam, J.N., H. K. Mohajan, and P. Moolio. 2009. Preference of Social Choice in Mathematical Economics. Indus Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 3(1): 17-38.

Miller, M.K. 2009. Social Choice Theory Without Pareto: The pivotal voter approach. Mathematical Social Sciences (Accepted 20 Feb. 2009).

Myerson, R.B. 1986. Multistage Games with Communication. Econometrica, 54: 323-358.

Myerson, R.B. 1985. An Introduction to Game Theory. Discussion Paper-623. Centre for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science, Northwestern University.

Myerson, R.B. 1993. Effectiveness of Electoral Systems for Reducing Government Corruption. Games and Economic Behavior, 5: 118-132.

Myerson, R.B. 1996. Fundamentals of Social Choice Theory. Discussion Paper-1162. Centre for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science, Northwestern University. Myerson, R.B. 2004. Justice Institution and Multiple Equilibria. Chicago Journal of International Law, 5: 91-107.

Myerson, R.B. 2006. Federalism and Incentives for Success of Democracy. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 1: 3-23.

Myerson, R.B. 2009. Constitutional Structures for a Strong Democracy: Considerations on the Government of Pakistan. Presentation Paper at Lahore University of Management Sciences.

Nash, J.F. 1951. Noncooperative Games. Annals of Mathematics, 54: 289-295.

Reny, P.J. 2000. Arrow’s Theorem and Gibbard-Satterthwait Theorem: A Unified Approach. Department of Economics. University of Chicago.

Sato, S. 2009. Strategy-Proof Social Choice with Exogenous Indifference Classes. Mathematical Social Sciences, 57: 48-57.

Satterthwaite, M.A. 1975. Strategy-Proofness and Arrow’s Conditions, Journal of Economic Theory, 10: 198-217.

Schelling, T.C. 1960. Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Storcken, T. 2008. Collective Choice Rules on Convex Restricted Domains. Maastricht: Maastricht Research

School of Economics of Technology and Organizations, University of Maastricht.

Sen, A.K. 1970. Collective Choice and Social Welfare. Holden Day: Oliver and Boyd.

Suzumura, K. 2007. Choice, Opportunities, and Procedures. Collected Papers of Kotaro Suzumura, Kunitatchi, Tokyo: Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University,.