Publication:

Why so much stability? Majority voting, legislative institutions, and Gordon Tullock

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2012

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Springer Science + Business Media
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Barry R. Weingast. 2012. Why so much stability? Majority voting, legislative institutions, and Gordon Tullock. Public Choice 152, no. 1/2: 83–95. doi:10.1007/s11127-011-9853-4.

Abstract

Gordon Tullock, nearly a half century ago, raised questions about Arrow’s Theorem (“a phantom has stalked the classrooms and seminars of economics and political science”). He followed this up by asking, in light of Arrow’s Theorem, “Why so much stability?” In this paper a more nuanced understanding of the operating characteristics of majority rule in institutional settings, anticipated and stimulated by Tullock, is spelled out. A major distinction is made between preference cycles and voting cycles, suggesting why Arrow’s phantom still stalks, but that Tullock’s intuitions are germane as well.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

voting cycles, preference cycles, majority rule, equilibrium

Terms of Use

Metadata Only

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories