Some broader issues of social choice

YEW-KWANG NG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-86487-1.50016-2

1983-01-01

Abstract:With contributions in an appendix from John Harsanyi, University of California at Berkeley

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Anarchy and Social Choice: Reflections on the International Polity

OR YOUNG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2009960

1978-01-01

World Politics

Abstract:The concept “social choice” provides a means of injecting new life into systemic analyses of the international polity. Bargaining, organized warfare, and coercive diplomacy are the most important mechanisms of social choice in the international polity. Third-party settlement is of lesser importance, though not irrelevant. Each of these mechanisms is evaluated in terms of criteria such as decisiveness, efficiency, justice, and the production of externalities. Systems of rights and rules serve to constrain processes of social choice, but they are also apt to become focal points of such processes themselves.
FUZZY PREFERENCES AND SOCIAL CHOICE*

Fang‐Fang Tang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8586.1994.tb00591.x

1994-01-01

Bulletin of Economic Research

Abstract:Bulletin of Economic ResearchVolume 46, Issue 3 p. 263-269 FUZZY PREFERENCES AND SOCIAL CHOICE* Fang-Fang Tang, Fang-Fang Tang University of BirminghamSearch for more papers by this author Fang-Fang Tang, Fang-Fang Tang University of BirminghamSearch for more papers by this author First published: July 1994 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8586.1994.tb00591.xCitations: 13 * I am very grateful for the inspiration and encouragement from my supervisor, Professor Prasanta K. Pattanaik. AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume46, Issue3July 1994Pages 263-269 RelatedInformation
THE HARSANYI-RAWLS DEBATE: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY AS DECISION THEORY UNDER UNCERTAINTY

RAMIRO ÁVILA PERES

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-6045.2021.v44n2.rp

2021-06-01

Manuscrito

Abstract:Social decisions are often made under great uncertainty - in situations where political principles, and even standard subjective expected utility, do not apply smoothly. In the first section, we argue that the core of this problem lies in decision theory itself - it is about how to act when we do not have an adequate representation of the context of the action and of its possible consequences. Thus, we distinguish two criteria to complement decision theory under ignorance - Laplace’s principle of insufficient reason and Wald’s maximin criterion. After that, we apply this analysis to political philosophy, by contrasting Harsanyi’s and Rawls’s theories of justice, respectively based on Laplace’s principle of insufficient reason and Wald’s maximin rule - and we end up highlighting the virtues of Rawls’s principle on practical grounds (it is intuitively attractive because of its computational simplicity, so providing a salient point for convergence) - and connect this argument to our moral intuitions and social norms requiring prudence in the case of decisions made for the sake of others.
Social Choice with Changing Preferences: Representation Theorems and Long-Run Policies

Kshitij Kulkarni,Sven Neth

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2011.02544

2020-11-05

Abstract:We study group decision making with changing preferences as a Markov Decision Process. We are motivated by the increasing prevalence of automated decision-making systems when making choices for groups of people over time. Our main contribution is to show how classic representation theorems from social choice theory can be adapted to characterize optimal policies in this dynamic setting. We provide an axiomatic characterization of MDP reward functions that agree with the Utilitarianism social welfare functionals of social choice theory. We also provide discussion of cases when the implementation of social choice-theoretic axioms may fail to lead to long-run optimal outcomes.

Multiagent Systems,Artificial Intelligence
A Welfarist Critique of Social Choice Theory: Interpersonal Comparisons in the Theory of Voting

Aki Lehtinen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v8i2.200

2015-01-01

Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics

Abstract:This paper provides a philosophical critique of social choice theory insofar as it deals with the normative evaluation of voting and voting rules. I will argue that the very method of evaluating voting rules in terms of whether they satisfy various conditions is deeply problematic because introducing strategic behaviour leads to a violation of any condition that makes a difference between voting rules. I also argue that it is legitimate to make interpersonal comparisons of utilities in voting theory. Combining a realistic account of voters’ behaviour with a utilitarian evaluation of the outcomes then leads to the judgment that strategic voting is beneficial. If it is, then Arrow's theorem does not have far-reaching consequences for democracy because one of its conditions is not normatively acceptable.
All "NG" Up On Clubs?: a "Bran-New Flawer" of Brennan-Flowers

Yew-Kwang Ng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109114218100900106

1981-01-01

Public Finance Quarterly

Abstract:This article attempts to clarifv two controversial issues in the theory of clubs: (I) Abstract Is the Buchanan (Economica 1965) framework similar to the Tiebout (JPE 1956)? (2) Is the Pareto optimality condition of Ng(Economica 1973) generally applicable? Buchanan's own authoritv is invoked to give a negative answer to issue 1. A negative answer to issue 2 is refuted as being based on a misinterpreta tion of Ng's method of maximizing Pareto optimality or total net benefit ofthe whole population as that of one club.
On the Issue of "Social Union" of the Late Years of Rawls and His Social View

YANG Xiao-chang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-7504.2012.06.006

2012-01-01

Abstract:Some communitarianists criticize theory of justice of Rawls for its projection of individual as "a self without any restrains",which leads to a great extent the neglect of his social view and theoretic focus in his late years in academic circle: the issue of "social union".However,Rawls not only regards modern democratic society as a "socially united" society required by the social members due to cooperative urge,but also as a "socially inserted" society in which social form and social history and tradition shape the identity of its member.Against this social view,the deep reason for Rawls to propose the issue of "social union" in his late years comes from the social form of life and tradition resulted from generations of the members' collective political and practical results.
Issues Concerning Rawls

WAN Jun-ren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-7504.2007.01.002

2007-01-01

Abstract:Rawls' Principle of Justice puts forward two principles concerning justice,resulting in the change of research direction in the philosophical circles in America and Europe.Ethics becomes again the focus of philosophical study.However,his principle is also criticized,on the one hand,by liberalists from within,that is,radical liberalists;on the other hand,by those out of liberalist camp,that is,communitarianism and republicanism.This article raises issues concerning the conditions of realizing justice system ignored by Rawls from the perspective of the reality of China.
Empirical and computational approaches to collective choice: introduction to a special issue

Sanders, Shane

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-024-01156-2

IF: 1.78

2024-04-21

Public Choice

Abstract:This special issue examines empirical and computational approaches to collective choice, the aggregation of individual preferences to form a public or social choice via some aggregation rule. Some of the aggregation rules considered herein include Borda rule, rank sum aggregation, and majority rule. Arrow (1951) demonstrated that axiomatic rationality at the individual level cannot assure freedom from aggregation paradoxes in collective choice, and this special issue considers several novel data sets and computational and experimental methods to assess the robustness of contemporary aggregation rules and settings. The collected papers provide much-needed evidence in a field that has traditionally presented empirical challenges.

economics,political science
Utility, Informed Preference, or Happiness

Yew-Kwang Ng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333992777_4

2000-01-01

Abstract:Even accepting welfarism (argued to be compelling at the ultimate level in Chapter 3), there is still the issue as to what the individual welfares in the welfarist social welfare function should represent. In particular, should the welfare of individuals be their (net) happiness as I define welfare, or should it be their utility (representing their preferences) as most economists seem to be assuming? Recently, Harsanyi (1997) argues, among other things, that in welfare economics and normative public policy, what are important are people’s informed preferences, rather than either their actual preferences (as emphasised by modern economists) or their happiness (as emphasised by early utilitarians). The main purpose of this chapter is to argue that pursuing Harsanyi’s argument that allows him to move from actual to informed preferences to its logical conclusion forces us to accept happiness as the ultimately important thing. The early utilitarians were right after all! Since I personally approve of Harsanyi’s basic argument, I regard myself as a follower who has become more Catholic than the Pope. (On the importance of distinguishing between preference and happiness, or between ‘decision utility’ and ‘experienced utility’, see Kahneman et al., 1997.)
Escaping Arrow's Theorem: The Advantage-Standard Model

Wesley H. Holliday,Mikayla Kelley

2024-07-01

Abstract:There is an extensive literature in social choice theory studying the consequences of weakening the assumptions of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem. Much of this literature suggests that there is no escape from Arrow-style impossibility theorems, while remaining in an ordinal preference setting, unless one drastically violates the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA). In this paper, we present a more positive outlook. We propose a model of comparing candidates in elections, which we call the Advantage-Standard (AS) model. The requirement that a collective choice rule (CCR) be representable by the AS model captures a key insight of IIA but is weaker than IIA; yet it is stronger than what is known in the literature as weak IIA (two profiles alike on $x,y$ cannot have opposite strict social preferences on $x$ and $y$). In addition to motivating violations of IIA, the AS model makes intelligible violations of another Arrovian assumption: the negative transitivity of the strict social preference relation $P$. While previous literature shows that only weakening IIA to weak IIA or only weakening negative transitivity of $P$ to acyclicity still leads to impossibility theorems, we show that jointly weakening IIA to AS representability and weakening negative transitivity of $P$ leads to no such impossibility theorems. Indeed, we show that several appealing CCRs are AS representable, including even transitive CCRs.

Theoretical Economics,Multiagent Systems
Utility, Preference, and Happiness: Following Harsanyi's Argument to its Logical Conclusion

Yew-Kwang Ng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.125168

1998-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Harsanyi (1997) argues that, for normative issues, informed preferences should be used, instead of actual preferences or happiness (or welfare). Following his argument allowing him to move from actual to informed preferences to its logical conclusion forces us to use happiness instead. Where informed preferences differ from happiness due to a concern for the welfare of others, using the former involves multiple counting. This (non-affective altruism) differs from and could be on top of the minding (affective altruism) of being happy seeing or helping others to be happy. The concerning/minding effect should be excluded/included in social decision. The concerning effect is shown to exist in a compelling hypothetical example. Just as actual preferences should be discounted due to the effects of ignorance and spurious preferences, informed preferences should also be discounted due to some inborn or acquired tendencies to be irrational, such as placing insufficient weights on the welfare of the future, maximizing our biological fitness instead of our welfare. Harsanyi's old result on utilitarianism is however defended against criticisms in the last decade.
Resolving the Complexity of Some Fundamental Problems in Computational Social Choice

Palash Dey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1703.08041

2017-03-23

Abstract:This thesis is in the area called computational social choice which is an intersection area of algorithms and social choice theory.

Data Structures and Algorithms,Artificial Intelligence,Multiagent Systems
Complex externalities: introduction to the special issue

Pablo Paniagua,Veeshan Rayamajhee,Ilia Murtazashvili

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-024-01176-y

IF: 1.78

2024-06-15

Public Choice

Abstract:This paper introduces the special issue on complex externalities and public choice. The collection of essays extends analytical bridges between public choice, property rights economics, and new institutional economics. The essays question many of our prevailing assumptions behind the standard conceptualization of externalities. They also offer pragmatic and theoretical alternatives and apply these insights to analyze radio spectrum, environmental pollution, intellectual property, and public health issues. These essays demonstrate the ongoing significance of public choice in addressing society's most pressing challenges.

economics,political science
Enumerating rights: more is not always better

Sheryl Ball,Chetan Dave,Stefan Dodds

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-023-01053-0

IF: 1.78

2023-05-11

Public Choice

Abstract:Contemporary political and policy debate rhetoric increasingly employs the language of 'rights': how they are assigned and what entitlements individuals in a society are due. While the obvious constitution design issues surround how rights enumeration affects the relationship between a government and its citizens, we instead analyze how rights framing impacts how citizens interact with each other. We design and implement a novel experiment to test whether social cooperation depends on the enumeration and positive or negative framing of the right of subjects to take a particular action. We find that when rights are framed positively, there exists an 'entitlement effect' that reduces social cooperation levels and crowds-out the tendency of individuals to act pro-socially.
Welfare Economics: Promoting Equality Through General Policies

Yew-Kwang Ng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.56367/oag-039-10756

2023-01-01

Abstract:Welfare economics: Promoting equality through general policies Yew-Kwang Ng, Emeritus Professor at the Department of Economics, Monash University, continues a discussion about welfare economics, focusing on efficiency supremacy in specific areas, arguing that equality should be promoted through general policies. In the April issue, I published a piece on ‘An Economic Analysis of Social Welfare’ and in an Open Access Government eBook, a piece on ‘The Welfare Foundation of Public Policies and Its Implications’. Here, and in subsequent pieces in October 2023, January and April 2024, I will discuss some important messages of welfare economics for public policies.
Representative Social Choice: From Learning Theory to AI Alignment

Tianyi Qiu

2024-10-31

Abstract:Social choice theory is the study of preference aggregation across a population, used both in mechanism design for human agents and in the democratic alignment of language models. In this study, we propose the representative social choice framework for the modeling of democratic representation in collective decisions, where the number of issues and individuals are too large for mechanisms to consider all preferences directly. These scenarios are widespread in real-world decision-making processes, such as jury trials, indirect elections, legislation processes, corporate governance, and, more recently, language model alignment. In representative social choice, the population is represented by a finite sample of individual-issue pairs based on which social choice decisions are made. We show that many of the deepest questions in representative social choice can be naturally formulated as statistical learning problems, and prove the generalization properties of social choice mechanisms using the theory of machine learning. We further formulate axioms for representative social choice, and prove Arrow-like impossibility theorems with new combinatorial tools of analysis. Our framework introduces the representative approach to social choice, opening up research directions at the intersection of social choice, learning theory, and AI alignment.

Machine Learning,Artificial Intelligence,Computation and Language,Computers and Society,Computer Science and Game Theory
Efficiency, Equality, and Happiness: on the Ethical Foundation of Public Policy

Yew-Kwang Ng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.129008

1998-01-01

Abstract:Discussing fundamental issues on the ethical foundation of public economic policy, this paper arrives at conclusions that will surprise most economists. While reviewing relevant contributions, it argues for happiness as the ultimate objective, in contrast to economists' preference for preference. It sanctions utilitarianism and the apparently extremely right-wing principle of 'treating a dollar as a dollar' whomsoever it goes to, except in the general tax/transfer system. This principle largely frees us from the paradox of interpersonal cardinal utility - the practical difficulty of obtaining interpersonal cardinal utilities necessary for social choice. The arguments are based on compelling ethical and positive logic, not dogmatic ideology.
Automated Reasoning in Social Choice Theory - Some Remarks

Siddharth Chatterjee,Arunava Sen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1403.3391

2014-03-13

Abstract:Our objective in this note is to comment briefly on the newly emerging literature on computer-aided proofs in Social Choice Theory. We shall specifically comment on two papers, one by Tang and Lin (2009) and another by Geist and Endriss (2011). We also provide statements and brief descriptions of the results discussed in this note.

Logic in Computer Science,Computer Science and Game Theory
Voting in agreeable societies

Deborah E. Berg,Serguei Norine,Francis Edward Su,Robin Thomas,Paul Wollan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0811.3245

2008-11-20

Abstract:When can a majority of voters find common ground, that is, a position they all agree upon? How does the shape of the political spectrum influence the outcome? When mathematical objects have a social interpretation, the associated theorems have social applications. In this article we give examples of situations where sets model preferences and develop extensions of classical theorems about convex sets, such as Helly's theorem, that can be used in the analysis of voting in "agreeable" societies.

Combinatorics,History and Overview

Some broader issues of social choice

Anarchy and Social Choice: Reflections on the International Polity

FUZZY PREFERENCES AND SOCIAL CHOICE*

THE HARSANYI-RAWLS DEBATE: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY AS DECISION THEORY UNDER UNCERTAINTY

Social Choice with Changing Preferences: Representation Theorems and Long-Run Policies

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

All "NG" Up On Clubs?: a "Bran-New Flawer" of Brennan-Flowers

On the Issue of "Social Union" of the Late Years of Rawls and His Social View

Issues Concerning Rawls

Empirical and computational approaches to collective choice: introduction to a special issue

Utility, Informed Preference, or Happiness

Escaping Arrow's Theorem: The Advantage-Standard Model

Utility, Preference, and Happiness: Following Harsanyi's Argument to its Logical Conclusion

Resolving the Complexity of Some Fundamental Problems in Computational Social Choice

Complex externalities: introduction to the special issue

Enumerating rights: more is not always better

Welfare Economics: Promoting Equality Through General Policies

Representative Social Choice: From Learning Theory to AI Alignment

Efficiency, Equality, and Happiness: on the Ethical Foundation of Public Policy

Automated Reasoning in Social Choice Theory - Some Remarks

Voting in agreeable societies