Abstract:
A two-house legislature can often be modelled as a proper simple game whose outcome depends on whether a coalition wins, blocks or loses in two smaller proper simple games. It is shown that there are exactly five ways to combine the smaller games into a larger one. This paper focuses on one of the rules, lexicographic composition, where a coalition wins G_1 => G_2 when it either wins in G_1, or blocks in G_1 and wins in G_2. It is the most decisive of the five. A lexicographically decomposable game is one that can be represented in this way using components whose player sets partition the whole set. Games with veto players are not decomposable, and anonymous games are decomposable if and only if they are decisive and have two or more players. If a player's benefit is assessed by any semi-value, then for two isomorphic games a player is better off from having a role in the first game than having the same role in the second. Lexicographic decomposability is sometimes compatible with equality of roles. A relaxation of it is suggested for its practical benefits.
Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from Cowles Foundation, Yale University, Box 208281, New Haven, CT 06520-8281 USA The price is None.
More papers in Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers from Cowles Foundation, Yale University Address: Yale University, Box 208281, New Haven, CT 06520-8281 USA Contact information at EDIRC. Series data maintained by Glena Ames ().
This site is part of RePEc
and all the data displayed here is part of the RePEc data set.
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to
contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .