Monotonicity Violations by Borda’s Elimination and Nanson’s Rules: A Comparison

Dan S. Felsenthal () and Hannu Nurmi
Additional contact information
Dan S. Felsenthal: University of Haifa
Hannu Nurmi: University of Turku

Group Decision and Negotiation, 2018, vol. 27, issue 4, No 6, 637-664

Abstract: Abstract This paper compares the vulnerability of Borda Elimination Rule (BER) and of Nanson Elimination Rule (NER) to monotonicity paradoxes under both fixed and variable electorates. It is shown that while NER is totally immune and BER is vulnerable to monotonicity failure in 3-candidate elections, neither of these two rules dominates the other in n-candidate elections (n > 3) when no Condorcet Winner exists. When the number of competing alternatives is larger than three and no Condorcet Winner exists, we find profiles where NER violates monotonicity while BER does not, profiles where BER violates monotonicity while NER does not, as well as profiles where both NER and BER violate monotonicity. These findings extend to both fixed and variable electorates, as well as to situations where the initial winners under both rules are the same, as well as to situations where the initial winners under both rules are different. So, which of the two rules should be preferred in terms of monotonicity in n-candidate elections (n > 3) where no Condorcet Winner exists, depends on the kind of profiles one can expect to encounter in practice most often. Nevertheless, in view of the results of 3-candidate elections under other scoring elimination rules, we conjecture that inasmuch as BER and NER exhibit monotonicity failures, it is more likely to occur in closely contested elections.

Keywords: Elections; Borda Elimination Rule; Nanson Elimination Rule; Non-monotonicity; Voting paradoxes (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-018-9580-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:grdene:v:27:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s10726-018-9580-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/10726/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10726-018-9580-z

Access Statistics for this article

Group Decision and Negotiation is currently edited by Gregory E. Kersten

More articles in Group Decision and Negotiation from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().