Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Voting for Locating Facilities: The Wisdom of Voters

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Contributions to Location Analysis

Part of the book series: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science ((ISOR,volume 281))

  • 480 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter we discuss the quality of decisions made by stakeholders with voting rights under some assumptions on their intention of maximising their own personal utility rather than the common good. In especial, we focus on decisions made by a particular social choice mechanism, Condorcet method, and how good are the voted decisions when compared to those of a central decision maker. Thus, this chapter brings to the front row the opposing views of centralised versus decentralised decision making. It makes a review of the state of the art in this subject, and highlights very recent results, in especial, the work presented in Menezes and Huang (Comput Oper Res 62:350–355, 2015), Drezner and Menezes (Ann Oper Res 246:205–226, 2014) and Menezes et al. (Eur J Oper Res 253:195–203, 2016).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alós-Ferrer, C., & Granić, D. (2012). Two field experiments on approval voting in Germany. Social Choice & Welfare, 39(1), 171–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. J. (2012). Social choice and individual values (3rd ed.), New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balinski, M., & Laraki, R. (2014). Judge: Don’t vote. Operations Research, 62(3), 483–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandelt, H. J., & Labbe, M. (1986). How bad can a voting location be. Social Choice & Welfare, 3, 125–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J., Altman, N. Y., & Kroll, S. (2005). Approval voting and parochialism. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(6), 895–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, O., Drezner, T., Drezner, Z., & Krass, D. (2009). Modeling competitive facility location problems: New approaches and results. In M. Oskoorouchi (Ed.), TutORials in Operations Research (pp. 156–181). San Diego: INFORMS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhadury, J., Griffin, P. M., Griffin, S. O., & Narasimhan, L. S. (1998). Finding the majority-rule equilibrium under lexicographic comparison of candidates. Social Choice & Welfare, 15(4), 489–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S., & Fishburn, P. C. (1978). Approval voting. American Political Science Review, 72, 831–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S. J., & Fishburn, P. C. (2001). A nail-biting election. Social Choice & Welfare, 18(3), 409–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S. J., & Fishburn, P. C. (2007). Approval voting. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buechel, B., (2014). Condorcet winners on median spaces. Social Choice & Welfare, 42(3), 735–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buenrostro, L., Dhillon, A., & Vida, P. (2013). Scoring rule voting games and dominance solvability. Social Choice & Welfare, 40(2), 329–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, T. (1994a). Locating a single new facility among existing unequally attractive facilities. Journal of Regional Science, 34, 237–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, T. (1994b). Optimal continuous location of a retail facility, facility attractiveness, and market share: An interactive model. Journal of Retailing, 70, 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, Z. (1982). Competitive location strategies for two facilities. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 12, 485–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, Z. (1996). A note on accelerating the Weiszfeld procedure. Location Science, 3, 275–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, Z., Klamroth, K., Schöbel, A., & Wesolowsky, G. O. (2002). The Weber problem. In Z. Drezner & H. W. Hamacher (Eds.), Facility location: Applications and theory (pp. 1–36). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, Z., & Menezes, M. (2014). The wisdom of voters: Evaluating the weber objective in the plane at the Condorcet solution. Annals of Operations Research, 246, 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, Z., & Suzuki, A. (2004). The big triangle small triangle method for the solution of non-convex facility location problems. Operations Research, 52, 128–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eiselt, H. A., Marianov, V., & Drezner, T. (2015). In G. Laport, S. Nickel, & F. S. Gama (Eds.), Location science. Berlin: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eiselt, H. A., & Sandblom, C.-L. (2014). Decision analysis, location models, and scheduling problems. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, R. L., Lowe, T. J., Rayco, M. B., & Tamir, A. (2009). Aggregation error for location models: Survey and analysis. Annals of Operations Research, 167, 171–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francis, R. L., McGinnis, L. F. Jr., & White, J. A. (1992). Facility layout and location: An analytical approach (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galton, F. (1907). Vox populi. Nature, 75, 450–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouret, F., Hollard, G., & Rossignol, S. (2011). An empirical analysis of valence in electoral competition. Social Choice & Welfare, 37(2), 309–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakimi, S. L. (1983). On locating new facilities in a competitive environment. European Journal of Operational Research, 12, 29–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakimi, S. L. (1986). p-Median theorems for competitive location. Annals of Operations Research, 6, 77–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, P., & Thisse, J.-F. (1981). Outcomes of voting and planning. Journal of Public Economics, 16, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, M., & Mourifié, I. (2013). Euclidean revealed preferences: Testing the spatial voting model. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 28(4), 650–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotelling, H. (1929). Stability in competition. Economic Journal, 39, 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huff, D. L. (1964). Defining and estimating a trade area. Journal of Marketing, 28, 34–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huff, D. L. (1966). A programmed solution for approximating an optimum retail location. Land Economics, 42, 293–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klamler, C., & Pferschy, U. (2007). The traveling group problem. Social Choice & Welfare, 29(3), 429–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoblauch, V. (2001). Using elections to represent preferences. Social Choice & Welfare, 18(4), 823–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labbé, M. (1985). Outcomes of voting and planning facility location problems in single facility location problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 20, 299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Love, R. F., Morris, J. G., & Wesolowsky, G. O. (1988). Facilities location: Models & methods. New York, NY: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menezes, M. B. C., & Huang, R. (2015). Comparison of Condorcet and Weber solutions on a plane: Social choice versus centralization. Computers & Operations Research, 62, 350–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menezes, M. B. C., Silveira, G. J. C., & Drezner, Z. (2016). Democratic elections and centralized decisions: Condorcet and approval voting compared with median and coverage locations. European Journal of Operational Research, 253, 195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill-III, S. (1985). A statistical model for Condorcet efficiency based on simulation under spatial model assumptions. Public Choice, 47(2), 389–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D. C., Philpotts, G. C., & Vanek, J. (1972). The social gains from exchanging votes: A simulation approach. Public Choice, 13(1), 55–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noltemeier, H., Spoerhase, J., & Wirth, H.-C. (2007). Multiple voting location and single voting location on trees. European Journal of Operational Research, 181, 654–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plassmann, F., & Tideman, T. N. (2014). How frequently do different voting rules encounter voting paradoxes in three-candidate elections? Social Choice & Welfare, 42(1), 31–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posamentier, A., & Lehmann, I. (2012). The secrets of triangles: A mathematical journey. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard, G., & Slinko, A. (2006). On the average minimum size of a manipulating coalition. Social Choice & Welfare, 27(2), 263–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A., & Felsenthal, D. S. (1990). Efficacy in small electorates under plurality and approval voting. Public Choice, 64(1), 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, W. J. (1931). The law of retail gravitation. New York, NY: Knickerbocker Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rich, L. (2010). Tapping the wisdom of the crowd. New York: The New York Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez, C. M. C., & Pérez, J. A. M. (2000). Comparison of α-Condorcet points with median and center locations. Sociaded de Estadistica e Investigacion Operativa TOP, 8, 215–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez, C. M. C., & Pérez, J. A. M. (2008). Multiple voting location problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 191, 437–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulman, M. (2018). Why the electoral college – History central website. Available at http://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.html (2018)

  • Sinopoli, F. D. (2000). Sophisticated voting and equilibrium refinements under plurality rule. Social Choice & Welfare, 17, 655–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds. New York, NY: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A. D., & Pacelli, A. (2008). Mathematics and politics (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Science +  Business Media, LLC.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weiszfeld, E. (1936). Sur le point pour lequel la somme des distances de n points donnés est minimum. Tohoku Mathematical Journal, 43, 355–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiszfeld, E., & Plastria, F. (2009). On the point for which the sum of the distances to n given points is minimum. Annals of Operations Research, 167, 7–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendel, R. E., & Thorson, S. J. (1974). Some generalizations of social decisions under majority rules. Econometrica, 42, 893–912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendell, R. E., & Hurter, A. P. (1973). Location theory, dominance and convexity. Operations Research, 21, 314–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NEOMA Business School – Rouen/Paris/Reims, Mont-Saint-Aignan, France

    Mozart B. C. Menezes

Authors
  1. Mozart B. C. Menezes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Management, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada

    H. A. Eiselt

  2. Department of Electrical Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Complex Engineering Systems Institute, Santiago, Chile

    Vladimir Marianov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Menezes, M.B.C. (2019). Voting for Locating Facilities: The Wisdom of Voters. In: Eiselt, H., Marianov, V. (eds) Contributions to Location Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 281. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19111-5_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation