Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Social Choice and Welfare 1/2006

01-01-2006 | Original Paper

How the size of a coalition affects its chances to influence an election

Author: Arkadii Slinko

Published in: Social Choice and Welfare | Issue 1/2006

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Since voting rules are prototypes for many aggregation procedures, they also illuminate problems faced by economics and decision sciences. In this paper we are trying to answer the question: How large should a coalition be to have a chance to influence an election? We answer this question for all scoring rules and multistage elimination rules, under the Impartial Anonymous Culture assumption. We show that, when the number of participating agents n tends to infinity, the ratio of voting situations that can be influenced by a coalition of k voters to all voting situations is no greater than \(D_{m} \frac{k}{n}\), where D m is a constant which depends only on the number m of alternatives but not on k and n. Recent results on individual manipulability in three alternative elections show that this estimate is exact for k=1 and m=3.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Footnotes
1
We write g(n)=O(f(n)) in case there is a positive constant C such that ∣g(n)∣≤Cf(n)∣ for all sufficiently large values of n and g(n)=Θ(f(n)) if there are positive constants C 1 and C 2 such that C 1f(n)∣≤∣g(n)∣≤C 2 f(n)∣ for all sufficiently large n.
 
2
The notation g(n)=o(f(n)) means that g(n)/f(n)→0, when n→∞.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Andrews GE (1976) The theory of partitions. Addison-Wesley, MassachusettsMATH Andrews GE (1976) The theory of partitions. Addison-Wesley, MassachusettsMATH
2.
go back to reference Barbera S (1978) A note on group strategy-proof decision schemes. Econometrica 47:637–640MathSciNet Barbera S (1978) A note on group strategy-proof decision schemes. Econometrica 47:637–640MathSciNet
4.
go back to reference Favardin P, Lepelley D, Serais J (2002) Borda rule, Copeland method and strategic manipulation. Rev Econ Des 7:213–228MATH Favardin P, Lepelley D, Serais J (2002) Borda rule, Copeland method and strategic manipulation. Rev Econ Des 7:213–228MATH
7.
8.
9.
go back to reference Lepelley D, Mbih B (1987) The proportion of coalitionally unstable situations under the plurality rule. Econ Lett 24:311–315MathSciNetCrossRef Lepelley D, Mbih B (1987) The proportion of coalitionally unstable situations under the plurality rule. Econ Lett 24:311–315MathSciNetCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lepelley D, Valognes F (2002) Voting rules, manipulability and social homogeneity. Public Choice, to appear Lepelley D, Valognes F (2002) Voting rules, manipulability and social homogeneity. Public Choice, to appear
11.
go back to reference Nitzan S (1985) The vulnerability of point-voting schemes to preference variation and strategic manipulation. Public Choice 47:349–370CrossRef Nitzan S (1985) The vulnerability of point-voting schemes to preference variation and strategic manipulation. Public Choice 47:349–370CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Pattanaik PK (1975) Strategic voting without collusion under binary and democratic group decision rules. Rev Econ Stud 42:93–103MATH Pattanaik PK (1975) Strategic voting without collusion under binary and democratic group decision rules. Rev Econ Stud 42:93–103MATH
13.
go back to reference Pattanaik PK (1978) Strategy and group choice. North-Holland, AmsterdamMATH Pattanaik PK (1978) Strategy and group choice. North-Holland, AmsterdamMATH
14.
go back to reference Pazner EA and E Wesley (1978) Cheatproofness properties of the plurality rule in large societies. Rev Econ Stud 45:85–91MathSciNetMATH Pazner EA and E Wesley (1978) Cheatproofness properties of the plurality rule in large societies. Rev Econ Stud 45:85–91MathSciNetMATH
17.
18.
go back to reference Satterthwaite MA (1975) Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. J Econ Theory 10:187–217MATHMathSciNetCrossRef Satterthwaite MA (1975) Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. J Econ Theory 10:187–217MATHMathSciNetCrossRef
Metadata
Title
How the size of a coalition affects its chances to influence an election
Author
Arkadii Slinko
Publication date
01-01-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Social Choice and Welfare / Issue 1/2006
Print ISSN: 0176-1714
Electronic ISSN: 1432-217X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-005-0052-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2006

Social Choice and Welfare 1/2006 Go to the issue