Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/233231 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2007
Series/Report no.: 
Discussion paper No. 15
Publisher: 
Aboa Centre for Economics (ACE), Turku
Abstract: 
The Borda Count (BC) is a positional voting procedure fairly often applied in nonpolitical choice settings. It has a usual mixture of good and bad theoretical properties. It is monotonic and consistent and excludes the election of an eventual Condorcet loser. It, however, does not necessarily choose the Condorcet winner when one exists. Its strategic properties have also been found unattractive. Some modifications to it have therefore been proposed, notably Nanson's method. We also compare the BC with two of its recent modifications, the modified Borda Count (MBC) and the quota Borda system (QBS). It turns out that, although similar in spirit to BC, MBC and QBS do not share one of the former's main justifications: the exclusion of an eventual Condorcet loser. It is also shown that QBS tends to lead to more majoritarian outcomes than BC.
Subjects: 
Borda Count
Nanson's method
Condorcet winner
Condorcet loser
monotonicity
consistency
JEL: 
D70
D71
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.