Borda count in a forward agenda

Keith L. Dougherty () and Robi Ragan ()
Additional contact information
Keith L. Dougherty: University of Georgia
Robi Ragan: Mercer University

Public Choice, 2024, vol. 199, issue 1, No 3, 27-44

Abstract: Abstract We prove that the core for Borda count is empty in many cases in which the majority core is non-empty. We then compare Borda count and majority rule in a forward agenda using a two-dimensional spatial voting model with minimal-intelligence agents who vote sincerely and propose randomly. The analysis allows us to compare Borda count and majority rule in a dynamic setting and to show which voting rule is more capable of attaining Pareto-optimal policies and utilitarian ideals under those conditions. We find that Borda count moves policies in the rough vicinity of the Copeland winner and typically outperforms majority rule on both criteria in twenty rounds or less. Majority rule often outperforms Borda count in 1000 rounds. This provides a modest step in the application of new voting rules to committees.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11127-022-01037-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:kap:pubcho:v:199:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11127-022-01037-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... ce/journal/11127/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s11127-022-01037-6

Access Statistics for this article

Public Choice is currently edited by WIlliam F. Shughart II

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