Abstract:When selecting a subset of candidates (a so-called committee) based on the preferences of voters, proportional representation is often a major desideratum. When going beyond simplistic models such as party-list or district-based elections, it is surprisingly challenging to capture proportionality formally. As a consequence, the literature has produced numerous competing criteria of when a selected committee qualifies as proportional. Two of the most prominent notions are Dummett's proportionality for solid coalitions (PSC) and Aziz et al.'s extended justified representation (EJR). Both guarantee proportional representation to groups of voters who have very similar preferences; such groups are referred to as solid coalitions by Dummett and as cohesive groups by Aziz et al. However, these notions lose their bite when groups are only almost solid or almost cohesive. In this paper, we propose proportionality axioms that are more robust: they guarantee representation also to groups that do not qualify as solid or cohesive. Further, our novel axioms can be easily verified: Given a committee, we can check in polynomial time whether it satisfies the axiom or not. This is in contrast to many established notions like EJR, for which the corresponding verification problem is known to be intractable. In the setting with approval preferences, we propose a robust and verifiable variant of EJR and a simply greedy procedure to compute committees satisfying it. In the setting with ranked preferences, we propose a robust variant PSC, which can be efficiently verified even for general weak preferences. In the special case of strict preferences, our notion is the first known satisfiable proportionality axiom that is violated by the Single Transferable Vote (STV). We also discuss implications of our results for participatory budgeting, querying procedures, and to the notion of proportionality degree.

Social Welfare Functions with Voters Qualifications: Impossibility Results

A new social welfare function with a number of desirable properties

The Equivalent Forms on Arrow Impossibility Theorem

Escaping Arrow's Theorem: The Advantage-Standard Model

A general impossibility theorem on Pareto efficiency and Bayesian incentive compatibility

A Welfarist Critique of Social Choice Theory: Interpersonal Comparisons in the Theory of Voting

Arrow's Impossibility Theorem: Computability in Social Choice Theory

The Equivalent Conditions of Dictatorship for Social Welfare Functions

An impossibility theorem concerning positive involvement in voting

Gibbard-Satterthwaite Success Stories and Obvious Strategyproofness

Non-Borda elections under relaxed IIA conditions

A quantitative Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem without neutrality

Semi-Random Impossibilities of Condorcet Criterion

Bentham or Nash? on the Acceptable Form of Social Welfare Functions*

A General Impossibility Theorem and Its Application to Individual Rights

Maximal Social Welfare Relations on Infinite Populations Satisfying Permutation Invariance

The necessity of knowledge concerning individual utility functions

A counter example to the theorems of social preference transitivity and social choice set existence under the majority rule

Pareto Efficient Nash Implementation Via Approval Voting

Research on Strategy-proofness for Social Welfare Functions

Robust and Verifiable Proportionality Axioms for Multiwinner Voting