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

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper attempts to address the issues of aggregation paradox and efficiency in collective choice. Specifically, it explores how empirical and computational methods can be used to assess the robustness of contemporary aggregation rules in different scenarios. The main focus includes:

1. **Aggregation Paradox**: The paper discusses the problem that individual rationality cannot guarantee the avoidance of aggregation paradoxes in collective choice. For example, Arrow (1951) demonstrated that axiomatic rationality at the individual level cannot ensure the absence of aggregation paradoxes in collective choice. The paper studies these paradoxes, such as violations of transitivity and independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA), through multiple datasets and computational methods.

2. **Robustness of Aggregation Rules**: The paper examines different aggregation rules, such as the Borda rule, rank sum aggregation, and majority rule, and evaluates their performance in different scenarios. The study finds that some rules may perform poorly in small sample situations, while others perform better in large-scale simulations.

3. **Resource Allocation and Conflict**: The paper also explores game theory issues in public resource allocation, such as why costly conflicts occur even when reconciliation options are available (Fearon, 1995). The study introduces the concept of discounting future resource expenditures and analyzes the impact of different trade regimes on the intensity of conflicts.

4. **Economic Well-being Index**: The paper creates an Economic Well-being (EWB) index based on the Borda count to measure the economic well-being of counties in the United States. The study finds that people tend to migrate to areas with higher economic well-being, but breaking down the index into its components can better explain population changes.

In summary, the paper systematically studies the issues of aggregation paradox and efficiency in collective choice through various methods and datasets, providing new evidence and insights for research in this field.