Publication: Why so much stability? Majority voting, legislative institutions, and Gordon Tullock
Loading...
Date
2012
Published Version
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.
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