The problems connected with logrolling (Bernholz, 1974) and vote-trading (Kramer, 1973; McKelvey, 1976; Plott, 1967) are special cases of much wider phenomena (Bernholz, 1981; Schwartz, 1981, 1986). These phenomena are, in fact, the only reasons for the inconsistencies of nondictatorial societies described by Arrow’s General Impossibility Theorem (Arrow, 1963/51; see Sen, 1987, for a review of Social Choice Theory) “if more than one issues are implied, if individuals have separable preference orderings and if such inconsistencies are not present concerning the alternatives of single issues”. Moreover, the respective “paradoxes” of voting and logrolling, usually distinguished in the literature, are identical (Bernholz, 2000). Also, the implied social inconsistencies can occur even if participating individuals have identical preferences but face different restrictions (Breyer, 1980). Finally, the problems put into the center of attention by Arrow would not exist without the presence of negative externalities (in its broad sense, that is, including also political externalities) (Bernholz, 1982). But then, as suggested by the Coase Theorem, generalized below, stable Pareto-optimal outcomes do result in the absence of transaction costs in spite of the validity of Arrow’s Theorem, provided that binding contracts are possible. Consequently, the following statement by Sen (1987, p. 383) is true only if contracts are not binding: “… it would appear that there is no way of arriving at a social choice procedure specifying what is to be chosen…, satisfying the appropriately interpreted (i.e., in terms of choice) conditions specified by Arrow…”.
This chapter is a revised version of an assay that first appeared in The Encyclopedia of Public Choice edited by Charles K. Rowley and Friedrich Schneider and published in 2004 by Kluwer Academic Publishers, Volume I, 296–305.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arrow, K.J. (1963/51). Social Choice and Individual Values. New York: Wiley.
Arrow, K.J. (ed.) (2002). Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Bernholz, P. (1974). ‘‘Logrolling, arrow-paradox and decision rules: A generalisation.’’ Kyklos 27, 49-72.
Bernholz, P. (1981). ‘‘A General Social Dilemma: Profitable Exchange and Intransitive Group Preferences.’’ Zeitschrift fuer Nationaloekonomie 40, 1-23; reprinted in J.M. Buchanan and
R.D. Tollison (eds.) (1984) Public Choice II, 361-381. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Bernholz, P. (1982). ‘‘Externalities as a necessary condition for cyclical social preferences.’’ Quarterly Journal of Economics 47(4), 699-705.
Bernholz, P. (1986). ‘‘A general constitutional possibility theorem.’’ Public Choice 51, 249-265.
Bernholz, P. (1997). ‘‘Property rights, contracts, cyclical social preferences and the coase theorem: a synthesis.’’ European Journal of Political Economy 13(3), 419-464.
Bernholz, P. (1999). ‘‘The generalized coase theorem and separable individual preferences: A comment.’’ European Journal of Political Economy 15, 331-335.
Bernholz, P. (2000). ‘‘Instability of voting outcomes, logrolling, Arrow, Coase, and all that: A different interpretation,’’ in P. Fishback et al. (eds.) Public Choice Essays in Honour of a Maverick Scholar: Gordon Tullock. Boston: Kluwer, pp. 83-97.
Breyer, F. (1980). ‘‘On the relevance of preference similarities for the paradox of voting— identical utility functions and cyclical majorities.’’ Kyklos 33, 523-530.
Buchanan, J.M. (1962). ‘‘Politics, policy and the pigovian margins.’’ Economica N.S. 29, 17-28.
Buchanan, J.M. and Tullock, G. (1962). The Calculus of Consent. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Coase, R.H. (1960). ‘‘The problem of social cost.’’ Journal of Law and Economics 3, 1-44.
Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
Gaertner, Wulf (2007). A Primer in Social Choice Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kramer, G. (1973). ‘‘On a class of equilibrium conditions for majority rule.’’ Econometrica 41, 285-297.
McKelvey, R.D. (1976). ‘‘Intransitivities in multidimensional voting models and some implications for agenda control.’’ Journal of Economic Theory 12, 472-482.
Mueller, D. (2003). Public Choice III. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Plott, C.R. (1967). ‘‘A notion of equilibrium and its possibility under majority rule.’’ American Economic Review, 57, 787-806.
Schwartz, T. (1981). ‘‘The universal instability theorem.’’ Public Choice 37, 487-501.
Schwartz, T. (1986). The Logic of Collective Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.
Sen, A. (1970). ‘‘The impossibility of a paretian liberal.’’ Journal of Political Economy 78, 152-157.
Sen, A. (1987). ‘‘Social choice,’’ in J. Eatwell, et al. (eds.) The New Palgrave. A Dictionary of Economics. Volume 4, London: Macmillan, pp. 382-393.
Williamson, O.E. (1981). ‘‘The modern corporation: Origins, evolution, attributes.’’ Journal of Economic Literature 19, 1537-1568.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer Science + Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bernholz, P. (2008). Social Choice, Coase Theorem, Contracts, and Logrolling. In: Readings in Public Choice and Constitutional Political Economy. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75870-1_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75870-1_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-74574-9
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-75870-1
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)