Social evaluation functionals with an arbitrary set of alternatives
Tóm tắt
This paper explores the concept of a social evaluation functional in the case of an arbitrary set of alternatives. In the first part, a characterization of projective social evaluations functionals is shown whenever the common restricted domain is the set of all bounded utility functions equipped with the supremum norm topology. The result makes a crucial use, among others, of a continuity axiom. In the second part, a comparison meaningful property is introduced for a social evaluation functional which allows us for obtaining a more general result with no continuity requirements. Finally, an impossibility theorem, which is reminiscent of that is obtained by Chichilnisky in (Q J Econ 97:337–352, 1982) but without using topological conditions, is offered.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Arrow, K. J. (1963). Social choice and individual values (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Bossert, W., & Weymark, J. A. (2004). Utility in social choice. In S. Barberà, P. J. Hammond, & C. Seidl (Eds.), Handbook of utility theory (Vol. 2, pp. 1099–1177). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Chapter 20.
Campbell, D. E., & Kelly, J. S. (2002). Impossibilty theorems in the arrovian framework. In K. J. Arrow, A. K. Sen, & K. Suzumura (Eds.), Handbook of social choice and welfare (Vol. 1, pp. 35–94). Amsterdam: North Holland. Chapter 1.
Candeal, J. C. (2015). Social evaluation functionals: A gateway to continuity in social choice. Social Choice and Welfare, 44, 369–388.
Candeal, J. C. (2016). Aggregation operators, comparison meaningfulness and social choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 75, 19–25.
Candeal, J. C., & Induráin, E. (2015). Comparison meaningful operators and ordinal invariant preferences. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 432, 806–819.
Chichilnisky, G. (1982). Social aggregation rules and continuity. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 97, 337–352.
Chichilnisky, G. (1983). Social choice and game theory: Recent results with a topological approach. In P. K. Pattanaik & M. Salles (Eds.), Social choice and welfare (pp. 103–120). Amsterdam: North-Holland. Chapter 6.
De Miguel, L., Campión, M. J., Candeal, J. C., Induráin, E., & Paternain, D. (2017). Pointwise aggregation of maps: Its structural functional equation and some applications to social choice. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 325, 137–151.
d’Aspremont, C., & Gevers, L. (2002). Social welfare functionals and interpersonal comparability. In K. J. Arrow, A. K. Sen, & K. Suzumura (Eds.), Handbook of social choice and welfare (Vol. 1, pp. 459–541). Amsterdam: North Holland. Chapter 10.
Fleurbaey, M., & Hammond, P. (2004). Interpersonally comparable utility. In S. Barberà, P. J. Hammond, & C. Seidl (Eds.), Handbook of utility theory (Vol. 2, pp. 1179–1285). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Chapter 21.
Gibbard, A. F. (2014). Intransitive social indifference and the Arrow dilemma. Review Economic Design, 18, 3–10.
Grabisch, M., Marichal, J. L., Mesiar, R., & Pap, E. (2009). Aggregation functions. Encyclopedia of mathematics and its applications (Vol. 127). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jones, M., Zhang, J., & Simpson, G. (2003). Aggregation of utility and social choice: A topological characterization. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47, 545–556.
Khmelnitskaya, A. B., & Weymark, J. A. (2000). Social choice with independent subgroup utility scales. Social Choice and Welfare, 17, 739–748.
Krantz, D., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement. Vol. I: Additive and polynomial representations. New York: Academic Press.
LeBreton, M., & Weymark, J. (2002). Arrovian social choice theory on economic domains. In K. J. Arrow, A. K. Sen, & K. Suzumura (Eds.), Handbook of social choice and welfare (Vol. 2, pp. 191–299). Amsterdam: North Holland. Chapter 17.
Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions: Introduction and critical survey. New York: Wiley.
Marichal, J. L. (2002). On order invariant synthesizing functions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 46, 661–676.
Marichal, J. L., & Mesiar, R. (2009). A complete description of comparison meaningful aggregation functions mapping ordinal scales into an ordinal scale: A state of the art. Aequationes Mathematicae, 77(3), 207–236.
Ovchinnikov, S., & Dukhovny, A. (2002). On order invariant aggregation functionals. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 46(1), 12–18.
Roberts, F. S. (1979). Measurement theory with applications to decision-making, utility and social sciences. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Roberts, K. W. S. (1980). Possibility theorems with interpersonally comparable welfare. The Review of Economic Studies, 47, 409–420.
Roberts, K. W. S. (1980). Interpersonal comparability and social choice theory. The Review of Economic Studies, 47, 421–439.
Roberts, K. W. S. (1983). Social choice rules and real-valued representations. Journal of Economic Theory, 29, 72–94.
Sen, A. K. (1970). Collective choice and social welfare. San Francisco: Holden-Day.
Sen, A. K. (1970). On weights and measures: Informational constraints in social welfare analysis. Econometrica, 45, 1539–1572.
Sen, A. K. (1977). Interpersonal aggregation and partial comparability. Econometrica, 38, 393–409. A correction (1972), Econometrica 40:959.
Weymark, J. A. (2014). An introduction to Allan Gibbard’s oligarchy theorem paper. Review Economic Design, 18, 1–2.