Skip to main content
Log in

Ordinal equivalence of power notions in voting games

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we are concerned with the preorderings (SS) and (BC) induced in the set of players of a simple game by the Shapley–Shubik and the Banzhaf–Coleman's indices, respectively. Our main result is a generalization of Tomiyama's 1987 result on ordinal power equivalence in simple games; more precisely, we obtain a characterization of the simple games for which the (SS) and the (BC) preorderings coincide with the desirability preordering (T), a concept introduced by Isbell (1958), and recently reconsidered by Taylor (1995): this happens if and only if the game is swap robust, a concept introduced by Taylor and Zwicker (1993). Since any weighted majority game is swap robust, our result is therefore a generalization of Tomiyama's. Other results obtained in this paper say that the desirability relation keeps itself in all the veto-holder extensions of any simple game, and so does the (SS) preordering in all the veto-holder extensions of any swap robust simple game.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Allingham, M.G. (1975), Economic power and values of games, Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie 35, 293–299.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Banzhaf, J.F. (1965), Weighted voting doesn't work: a mathematical analysis, Rutgers Law Review 19, 317–343.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Diffo Lambo, L. and Moulen, J. (2001), Quel pouvoir mesure-t-on dans un jeu de vote? Mathématiques et Sciences Humaines 152, 27–47.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Moulen, J. and Diffo Lambo, L. (2001), Théorie du vote Hermes Science Publications, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Felsenthal, D.S. and Machover, M. (1995), Postulates and paradoxes of relative voting power – a critical re-appraisal, Theory and Decision 38, 195–229.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Isbell, J.R., (1975), A class of simple games, Duke Mathematical Journal 25, 423–439.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Moulen, J. (1997), Comparaison de notions de pouvoir dans un jeu de vote. Documents du CREUSET, Université de Saint-Etienne, Juillet 1997.

  8. Shapley, L.S. and Shubik, M. (1954), A model for evaluating the distribution of power in a committee system, Amer. Poli. Science Review 48, 787–792.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Taylor, A. and Zwicker, W. (1993), Weighted voting, multicameral representation, and power, Games and Economic Behavior 5, 170–181.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Taylor, A.D. (1995), Mathematics and Politics. Springer, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Taylor, A.D. and Zwicker, W.S. (1999), Simple Games. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tomiyama, Y. (1987), Simple Game, Voting Representation and Ordinal Power Equivalence, Int. Jour. on Policy and Information 11(1), 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Diffo Lambo, L., Moulen, J. Ordinal equivalence of power notions in voting games. Theory and Decision 53, 313–325 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024158301610

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024158301610

Navigation