Conclave

Maksymilian Kwiek

European Economic Review, 2014, vol. 70, issue C, 258-275

Abstract: A committee is choosing between two alternatives. If the required supermajority is not reached, voting is repeated indefinitely, although there is a cost to delay. Under suitable assumptions the equilibrium analysis provides a sharp prediction. The result can be interpreted as a generalization of the seminal median voter theorem known from the simple majority case. If a supermajority is required instead, the power to select the outcome moves from the median voter to the more extreme voters. Normative analysis indicates that, in the utilitarian sense, simple majority is strictly inferior to some supermajorities. Even if unanimity is a bad voting rule, voting rules close to unanimity may be efficient. The more likely it is to have very many almost indifferent voters and some very opinionated ones, the more stringent a supermajority is required for efficiency.

Keywords: Supermajority; Qualified majority; Repeated voting; Conclave; War of attrition (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: D63 D72 D74 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292114000750
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:eecrev:v:70:y:2014:i:c:p:258-275

DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2014.05.004

Access Statistics for this article

European Economic Review is currently edited by T.S. Eicher, A. Imrohoroglu, E. Leeper, J. Oechssler and M. Pesendorfer

More articles in European Economic Review from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().