Single-Stage Election Procedures

William V. Gehrlein and Dominique Lepelley
Additional contact information
William V. Gehrlein: University of Delaware

Chapter Chapter 4 in Elections, Voting Rules and Paradoxical Outcomes, 2017, pp 85-115 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract A discussion is presented regarding the single-stage election procedures Plurality, Negative Plurality, and Borda Rules; with an emphasis on their Condorcet Efficiency, which measures their propensity to elect the Condorcet Winner. A theoretical analysis shows how the Condorcet Efficiency of these voting rules change as the various measures of group mutual coherence change. Both Plurality and Negative Plurality Rules are found to perform very poorly over identifiable ranges of the defined measures of group mutual coherence. While Borda Rule is not always found to be the most Condorcet Efficient single-stage rule in all scenarios, it never performs poorly under any scenario. These theoretical results are then reinforced by empirically-based analysis to show very solid support for using Borda Rule, despite some concerns that have been expressed that Borda Rule requires voters to rank candidates, while Plurality and Negative Plurality Rules do not.

Date: 2017
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:stcchp:978-3-319-64659-6_4

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9783319646596

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-64659-6_4

Access Statistics for this chapter

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