The replacement principle for the provision of multiple public goods on tree networks

This article considers the provision of two public goods on tree networks where each agent has a single-peaked preference. We show that if there are at least four agents, then no social choice rule exists that satisfies efficiency and replacement-domination. In fact, these properties are incompatible, even if agents’ preferences are restricted to a smaller domain of symmetric single-peaked preferences. However, for rules on an interval, we prove that Miyagawa’s (Soc Choice Welf 18:527–541, 2001) characterization that only the left-peaks rule and the right-peaks rule satisfy both of these properties also holds on the domain of symmetric single-peaked preferences. Moreover, if agents’ peak locations are restricted to either the nodes or the endpoints of trees, rules exist on a subclass of trees. We provide a characterization of a family of such rules for this tree subclass.     

Consequences, opportunities, and procedures

This paper reflects on consequentialism which underlies the traditional normative economics. It asserts that the informational basis of normative economics should be expanded so that the intrinsic value of social choice procedures should be properly taken into account along with the value of their consequences. Three examples – the problem of fair cake division, the role of competition in the promotion of economic welfare, and bilateral trade restrictions – are invoked to pinpoint the services rendered by procedural considerations in making social welfare judgements. The Pareto libertarian paradox is also re-examined within the extended framework incorporating procedural considerations along with consequential considerations. Received: 25 March 1997 / Accepted: 8 July 1997     

Unequivocal majority and Maskin-monotonicity

The unequivocal majority of a social choice rule is a number of agents such that whenever at least this many agents agree on the top alternative, then this alternative (and only this) is chosen. The smaller the unequivocal majority is, the closer it is to the standard (and accepted) majority concept. The question is how small can the unequivocal majority be and still permit the Nash-implementability of the social choice rule; i.e., its Maskin-monotonicity. We show that the smallest unequivocal majority compatible with Maskin-monotonicity is n- ë \fracn-1m û{n-\left\lfloor \frac{n-1}{m} \right\rfloor} , where n ≥ 3 is the number of agents and m ≥ 3 is the number of alternatives. This value is equal to the minimal number required for a majority to ensure the non-existence of cycles in pairwise comparisons. Our result has a twofold implication: (1) there is no Condorcet consistent social choice rule satisfying Maskin-monotonicity and (2) a social choice rule satisfies k-Condorcet consistency and Maskin-monotonicity if and only if k 3 n- ë \fracn-1m û{k\geq n-\left\lfloor \frac{n-1}{m}\right\rfloor}.     

The core of social choice problems with monotone preferences and a feasibility constraint

We consider collective choice with agents possessing strictly monotone, strictly convex and continuous preferences over a compact and convex constraint set contained in ₊^k . If it is non-empty the core will lie on the efficient boundary of the constraint set and any policy not in the core is beaten by some policy on the efficient boundary. It is possible to translate the collective choice problem on this efficient boundary to another social choice problem on a compact and convex subset of ₊^c (c<k) with strictly convex and continuous preferences. In this setting the dimensionality results in Banks (1995) and Saari (1997) apply to the dimensionality of the boundary of the constraint set (which is lower than the dimensionality of the choice space by at least one). If the constraint set is not convex then the translated lower dimensional problem does not necessarily involve strict convexity of preferences but the dimensionality of the problem is still lower. Broadly, the results show that the homogeneity afforded by strict monotonicity of preferences and a compact constraint set makes generic core emptyness slightly less common. One example of the results is that if preferences are strictly monotone and convex on ² then choice on a compact and convex constraint exhibits a version of the median voter theorem.I thank Donald Saari for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.     

Topological aggregation of preferences: the case of a continuum of agents

 This paper studies the topological approach to social choice theory initiated by G. Chichilnisky (1980), extending it to the case of a continuum of agents. The social choice rules are continuous anonymous maps defined on preference spaces which respect unanimity. We establish that a social choice rule exists for a continuum of agents if and only if the space of preferences is contractible. We provide also a topological characterization of such rules as generalized means or mathematical expectations of individual preferences. Received: 30 November 1994/Accepted: 22 April 1996     

Hierarchy of players in swap robust voting games

Ordinarily, the process of decision making by a committee through voting is modeled by a monotonic game the range of whose characteristic function is restricted to {0, 1}. The decision rule that governs the collective action of a voting body induces a hierarchy in the set of players in terms of the a-priori influence that the players have over the decision making process. In order to determine this hierarchy in a swap robust game, one has to either evaluate a power index (e.g., the Shapley–Shubik index, the Banzhaf–Coleman index) for each player or conduct a pairwise comparison between players, whereby a player i is ranked higher than another player j if there exists a coalition in which i is more desirable as a coalition partner than j. In this paper, we outline an alternative mechanism to determine the ranking of players in terms of their a-priori power. This simple and elegant method uses only minimal winning coalitions, rather than the entire set of winning coalitions.     

On the voluntary exchange of libertarian rights

Harel and Nitzan recently formulated a resolution scheme for Sen's Pareto libertarian paradox, where libertarian decision-making entitlements actually change hands through the voluntary exchange of rights-endowments. Being a rigorous formalization of the strong libertarian tradition of free contract as advocated by Buchanan and Barry, this scheme serves as a natural target for our attempt to evaluate the logical capability and ethical nature of this tradition. It will be shown that this proposed scheme can hardly qualify, logically as well as ethically, as a libertarian resolution of the Pareto libertarian paradox.This paper was presented at the Murphy Conference on Liberty and Rights, Murphy Institute of Political Economy, Tulane University, September 16–17, 1989 and the VIth World Congress of the Econometric Society, Barcelona, August 22–28, 1990. Thanks are due to Professors Wulf Gaertner, Jerry S. Kelly, Prasanta K. Pattanaik, Amartya K. Sen, and K. Suga for their helpful comments and discussions. Thanks are also due to the referees of Social Choice and Welfare, whose comments greatly helped me to improve my exposition. By the time I completed the first draft of this paper, I was unaware of a related paper by Breyer (1990). I will comment on the partial overlap between our works at a later stage.     

Identification of domain restrictions over which acyclic, continuous-valued, and positive responsive social choice rules operate

We consider a social choice problem in various economic environments consisting of n individuals, 4≤n<+∞, each of which is supposed to have classical preferences. A social choice rule is a function associating with each profile of individual preferences a social preference that is assumed to be complete, continuous and acyclic over the alternatives set. The class of social choice rules we deal with is supposed to satisfy the two conditions; binary independence and positive responsiveness. A new domain restriction for the social choice rules is proposed and called the classical domain that is weaker than the free triple domain and holds for almost all economic environments such as economies with private and/or public goods. In this paper we explore what type of classical domain that admits at least one social choice rule satisfying the mentioned conditions to well operate over the domain. The results we obtained are very negative: For any classical domain admitting at least one social choice rule to well operate, the domain consists only of just one profile.     

Brahmin Left versus Merchant Right? Education,class, multiparty competition,and redistribution in Western Europe

In this article, we revisit the main claims of Part Four of Thomas Piketty's Capital and Ideology and especially the changing support coalitions for parties of the left. Piketty's core argument in this part of the book is that the left now represents the highly educated and that, as a result, the redistributive preferences of the working class do not find representation in today's party systems. We address these claims building on existing political science research that has investigated the transformation of politics in advanced capitalist societies. We argue, first, that the educational divide cannot be adequately analyzed by looking at a left and a right bloc, but crucially needs to pay attention to the rise of green/left‐libertarian and radical right parties. Second, we contend that the new middle classes that support parties of the left are largely in favor of economic redistribution. Analyzing data from the European Social Survey in 11 West European countries from 2002 to 2018, we show that the effect of education on voting left or right is indeed largely driven by green/left‐libertarian and radical right parties, while there is little empirical evidence that social democratic parties represent the educational elite. We also find that redistributive preferences remain at the heart of voting behavior and that, especially for educated voters, these preferences determine whether someone votes for a party of the left rather than the right.     

Consistency between tastes and values: A universalization approach

The object of this paper is to propose a consistency test for an individual involved in collective choice process. Collective choice processes considered in the paper are those that transform individuals ‘tastes’– which reflect the self-interested view point of the individuals – into (social) ranking of alternatives. In addition to her tastes, an individual has values about the way by which collective decision should be made. We distinguish two categories of such values. First, there are end-values that restrict the class of social rankings that the individual considers ethically acceptable. Second there are aggregation-values that specify the way by which the social ranking should depend upon the individuals tastes. The consistency test stands on an hypothetical operation of universalization of the individual tastes to everyone. Five illustrations of the potential usefulness of our approach for interpreting social choice theory and welfare economics are proposed. These illustrations deal with utilitarian aggregation in the presence of income inequality aversion, the so-called ‘ethics of responsibility’ and the aggregation of individual ranking of opportunity sets based on their freedom of choice. A discussion of the relevance of the consistency test for addressing the problem of ‘laundering’ individual preferences is also provided. Received: 25 June 1998/Accepted: 16 March 1999     

How to choose a non-controversial list with k names

Barberà and Coelho (WP 264, CREA-Barcelona Economics, 2007) documented six screening rules associated with the rule of k names that are used by diferent institutions around the world. Here, we study whether these screening rules satisfy stability. A set is said to be a weak Condorcet set à la Gehrlein (Math Soc Sci 10:199–209) if no candidate in this set can be defeated by any candidate from outside the set on the basis of simple majority rule. We say that a screening rule is stable if it always selects a weak Condorcet set whenever such set exists. We show that all of the six procedures which are used in reality do violate stability if the voters do not act strategically. We then show that there are screening rules which satisfy stability. Finally, we provide two results that can explain the widespread use of unstable screening rules.     

The distribution problem and Rawlsian reasoning

The difference principle of Rawls has been wrongly translated in the formal literature on welfare economics and social choice theory. The difference principle is concerned with the welfare of the members of the least advantaged segment, and, thus, does not – as frequently argued – assign dictatorial power to the person in the worst off position in society. This distinction is important, and the focus on a leximingroup rule makes the Rawlsian position more plausible than it is in the `disguise' of the conventional leximin rule. However, there is a difficulty with this approach, to wit how to understand the least advantaged segment in society. Various definitions are considered in the paper, but it turns out that in most cases these definitions imply that we have to accept the leximin rule. We suggest one line of reasoning that makes the Rawlsian leximingroup rule a genuine alternative to the leximin rule. In this approach, an independent norm level is imposed on the analysis (i.e. a cut off line that is independent of the distribution of welfare under consideration), and the least advantaged segment is identified as those who have less than this minimum stipend. Received: 21 December 1994/Accepted: 15 June 1998     

A characterization of the Walras rule

This paper has three purposes. First, we refine the characterization of the Walras rule proposed by Nagahisa (JET 1991) over a more natural and simple domain than the one he employed. We show that the Walras rule is the only social choice rule defined over the domain and satisfying Individual Rationality, Pareto Efficiency, and Local Independence. Second, assuming endowments to be collectively owned, we show that the Walras rule operated from equal division is the only social choice rule satisfying No Envy, Pareto Efficiency, and Local Independence. Third, we show that for every social choice rule satisfying Individual Rationality and Pareto Efficiency, Local Independence is equivalent to a condition of Nash implementation with a game form satisfying convexity.This article is a revised version of Toyama University Working Paper No. 141. We are grateful to Professors William Thomson, Shinsuke Nakamura, Tomoichi Shinotsuka and two anonymous referees for their detailed comments. Nagahisa is grateful for hospitality of the economics department of the University of Rochester.     

Quasi-decisiveness, quasi-ultrafilter, and social quasi-orderings

The aim of the present paper is to provide an axiomatic analysis of incomplete social judgments. In particular, we clarify the underlying power structure of Arrovian collective choice rules when social preferences are allowed to be incomplete. We propose the concept of quasi-decisiveness and investigate the properties of the collection of quasi-decisive sets associated with an Arrovian collective choice rule. In the course of this, we offer a series of applications.     

DO RENT‐SEEKING GROUPS ANNOUNCE THEIR SHARING RULES?

We study collective rent seeking between two groups in which each group has the option of releasing or not its sharing‐rule information. First, we show that the case where both groups release their sharing‐rule information never occurs in equilibrium; when the players are unevenly matched, one group releases its sharing‐rule information and the other does not. Then, we select the Pareto‐superior equilibrium when the players are unevenly matched. We show that, in this selected equilibrium, the underdog releases its sharing‐rule information, and the favorite does not; thus, the underdog becomes the leader, and the favorite the follower (JEL D72).     

The multiplicity of Hawaiian sovereignty claims and the struggle for meaningful autonomy

Abstract

There are multiple Hawaiian political claims and entitlements. Is independence appropriate for Hawai'i? Is it appropriate for Hawaiians? These two questions are not one and the same. In the movement today, there are multiple levels of ambiguity about these two claims – the right to indigenous self-determination under US domestic law and Hawai'i's right to self-determination under international law – as evidenced in the strategic invocation of both. The persistent maintenance of the dual claim reveals a particular sort of political ambivalence having to do with the dilemmas over the exercise of sovereignty in the 21st century. This article examines two different claims – one which is specific to Hawaiians as an indigenous people subjugated by US colonialism, and the other which is not limited to the indigenous and focuses on the broader national claims to Hawai'i's independence. Within this latter arena, there are two distinct lines of political activism and legal claims – one that calls for de-colonization protocols and the other that calls for de-occupation.     

Social Work in the University

Abstract

This article asserts that social work is failing to fulfill its professional obligations to people in need, in part because its academic institutions are failing to perform their basic intellectual functions. The author presents evidence that false reports of the effectiveness of the nation's social welfare services exaggerate the degree to which social therapeutics and professional techniques have been successful, which has in turn prevented an accurate approach to resolving social problems and has diminished the claims of people in need. The author asserts that a reinvigorated role for academic social work requires credible research, a shift in curricular emphases, and a supportive constituency drawn from populations at risk and their organizations.     

Top-Pair and Top-Triple Monotonicity

We say that a social choice function (SCF) satisfies Top-k Monotonicity if the following holds. Suppose the outcome of the SCF at a preference profile is one of the top k-ranked alternatives for voter i. Let the set of these k alternatives be denoted by B. Suppose that i’s preference ordering changes in such a way that the set of first k-ranked alternatives remains the set B. Then the outcome at the new profile must belong to B. This definition of monotonicity arises naturally from considerations of set “improvements” and is weaker than the axioms of strong positive association and Maskin Monotonicity. Our main results are that if there are two voters then a SCF satisfies unanimity and Top-2 or Top-pair Monotonicity if and only if it is dictatorial. If there are more than two voters, then Top-pair Monotonicity must be replaced by Top-3 Monotonicity (or Top-triple Monotonicity) for the analogous result. Our results demonstrate that connection between dictatorship and “improvement” axioms is stronger than that suggested by the Muller–Satterthwaite result (Muller and Satterthwaite in J Econ Theory 14:412–418, 1977) and the Gibbard–Sattherthwaite theorem.     

Equilibrium in abstract political economies: with an application to a public good economy with voting

Consider an abstract political economy which has a collective choice rule together with strategic interactions among players. We prove that there exists an equilibrium in such an economy by synthesizing an equilibrium existence theorem in generalized games by Shafer and Sonnenschein (1975) and a voting core existence theorem in simple games by Schofield (1984, 1989). The theorem can be applied to a public good economy where public good provisions are determined by a class of voting rule.Thanks are due to David Austen-Smith, Jeffrey Banks, Marcus Berliant, Steve Ching, Ryo-Ichi Nagahisa, Mary Beth Savio, Norman Schofield, and Tomoichi Shinotsuka. Detailed comments from an anonymous referee of the journal are gratefully acknowledged. Errors are, of course, my own.     

Occupational Claims to Professionalism: The Case of Paralegals

This article, based on fifty‐one in‐depth interviews with paralegals working in private law firms, bridges the gap between sociologists' understanding of professions and professionalization and workers' subjective meaning of professional and professionalism. For paralegals to be professional, they must be both competent and capable of maintaining the proper demeanor, which includes their thoughts, behaviors, appearances, and emotions. Ironically, paralegals claim the title professional, or make claims to professionalism, to make themselves feel better about the unprofessional manner in which they are treated by attorneys; however, their assumptions about the meaning of professionalism undercut the likelihood that they will ever make collective demands for the professional treatment they seek.