Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T01:35:47.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Une étude expérimentale de la forte stabilité*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Abdoul Aziz Ndiaye
Abdoul Aziz Ndiaye*
Affiliation:
LARES‡, Université Gaston Berger de Saint-Louis du Sénégal
Get access

Résumé

Dans cet article, nous étudions la forte stabilité d'une règle de vote telle que définie par Dutta et al. [2001] par l'intermédiaire de la méthode expérimentale. Dans ce sens, une règle de vote est dite fortement stable si le vainqueur de l'élection reste inchangé après une tentative de manipulation par candidature stratégique d'un candidat potentiel. Dans le cadre d'une élection avec trois candidats en lice et d'un électorat de petite taille, nous évaluons de façon expérimentale les fréquences de la forte stabilité des règles de vote parlementaires et de la pluralité.

Summary

Summary

In this paper, we study the strong candidate stability of a voting procedure as denned by Dutta et al. [2001] through the experimental method. In this sense, a voting rule is said to be strongly candidate stable if the winner of the election remains unchanged after an attempted manipulation by strategic candidacy of a potential candidate. In an election with three candidates and a small electorate, we evaluate experimentally frequencies of the strong candidate stability of parliamentary voting rules and plurality.

Keywords

strategic candidacystrong candidate stabilityexperimental methodfrequenciesparliamentary voting rulespluralityD71candidature stratégiqueforte stabilitéméthode expérimentalefréquencesrègles de vote parlementairespluralitéD71
Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 80 , Issue 1 , 2014 , pp. 89 - 103
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Nous traduisons la “strong candidate stability” de DJL [2001] par la forte stabilité.

†

Nous tenons à remercier Guillaume Hollard de I’Université de Paris 1 et Mamadou Abdoulaye Konté de I’Université Gaston Berger de Saint-Louis pour leurs remarques et suggestions très pertinentes.

‡

Laboratoire de Recherches Economiques de Saint-Louis, Université Gaston Berger, BP : 234.

References

Bibliographie

Banks, J. S. (1985). “Sophisticated Voting Outcomes and Agenda Control”, Social Choice and Welfare 1, 295–306.Google Scholar
Béhue, V., Favardin, P., Lepelley, D. (2009). “La manipulation stratégique des règles de vote: une étude expérimentale”, Recherches économiques de Louvain 75, 503–516.Google Scholar
Borda, J. C. (1781). “Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin”, Histoire de l’Académie Royales des Sciences.Google Scholar
Condorcet, J. M. A. N. C. (1785). “Essai sur l’application de l’analyse à la probabilité des décisions rendues à la pluralité des voix”, Imprimerie Royale, Paris.Google Scholar
Congar, R. et Merlin, V. (2012). “A characterization of the maximin rule in the context of voting”, Theory and Decision 72, 131–147.Google Scholar
Dutta, B., Jackson, M. O. and Le Breton, M. (2002). “Voting by Successive Elimination and Strategic Candidacy”, Journal of Economic Theory 103, 190–218.Google Scholar
Dutta, B., Jackson, M. O. and Le Breton, M. (2001). “Strategic candidacy and voting procedures”, Econometrica 69, 1013–1037.Google Scholar
Dutta, B. and Pattanaik, P. K. (1978). On strategic manipulation of issues in group decision: In Strategy and group choice, Amsterdam Economica.Google Scholar
Farquharson, R. (1969). Theory of voting, Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
Gibbard, A. (1973). “Manipulation of voting schemes: a general result”, Econometrica 41, 587–601.Google Scholar
Gehrlein, W. V. et Fishburn, P.C. (1976). “The probability of the paradox of voting : a computable solution”, Journal of Economic Theory 13, 14–25.Google Scholar
Majumdar, P. (1956). “Choice and revealed preference”, Econometrica 24, 71–73.Google Scholar
Mbih, B., Moyouwou, I. et Ndiaye, A. A. (2009). “Parliamentary voting rules and strategic candidacy”, Economics bulletin 29, 1381–1389.Google Scholar
Moreno, B. et Puy, M. S. (2009). “Plurality Rule Works In Three-Candidate Elee- tions,” Theory and Decision 67, 145–162.Google Scholar
Moreno, B. et Puy, M. S. (2005). “The scoring rules in an endogenous election,” Social Choice and Welfare 25, 115–125.Google Scholar
Ndiaye, A. A. (2013). “Forte stabilité et vainqueur de Condorcet”, Revue d’économie politique, 123, 793–808.Google Scholar
Plott, C. R., Smith, V. L. (1978). “An experimental Examination of two exchange institutions”, The review of economic studies 45, 133–153.Google Scholar
Rasch, B.E. (2000). “Parliamentary Floor Voting Procedures and Agenda Setting in Europe”, Legislative Studies Quarterly 25, 3–23.Google Scholar
Saari, D. G., Valognes, F. (1999). “The geometry of Black’s Single Peakedness and Related Conditions”, Journal of Mathematical Economics 32, 429–456.Google Scholar
Samejima, Y. (2007). “Strategic candidacy and Single-Peakedness”, Japanese Economic Review 58, 423–442.Google Scholar
Satterthwaite, M. (1975). “Strategyproofness and Arrow’s conditions: existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions”, Journal of Economic Theory 10, 187–217.Google Scholar
Zakharov, A.V. (2008). “A Model of Electoral Competition with Abstaining Voters”, Mathematical and Computer Modeling 48, 1527–1553.Google Scholar