 Application to MCDM: Choosing a Library NameAndranik Tangian
Chapter Chapter 18 in Analytical Theory of Democracy, 2020, pp 751-760 from Springer Abstract: Abstract From the formal viewpoint, ‘representatives’ do not necessarily have to be individuals. In Chapters 8–10 and 13–17, the representatives are not persons but political parties, and now we go even further, requiring no human nature of representatives but only their capacity to represent the interests of a group of people. More specifically, when choosing among an assortment of alternatives, the group members have various preferences regarding the nature of a solution being sought. Since these choice alternatives reflect collective opinions, they can be considered better or worse representatives of the social/collective will. This idea is applied to the exercise of deciding on a name for the campus library by a supervising committee. Its members have differing opinions, such as whether the library should reflect the national affiliation, be named after a great man, relate to sciences, and so forth. Regarding the balances of opinion on these issues, the alternative library names are evaluated using the indices of popularity and universality, which help to find the optimal compromise and bring the committee to a rational consensus. Date: 2020 There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:stcchp:978-3-030-39691-6_18 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-39691-6_18 Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Studies in Choice and Welfare from Springer |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.