Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing ((STUDFUZZ,volume 315))

  • 787 Accesses

Abstract

This concluding chapter provides a summary of the findings from this book. After showing that a fuzzy maximal set exists, a fuzzy aggregation rule was shown to exist which satisfies all five Arrowian conditions including nondictatorship. Although the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem has considered individual fuzzy preferences, this book shows that both individuals and groups can choose alternatives to varying degrees resulting in a social choice that can be both strategy proof and non-dictatorial.Under strict fuzzy preferences, the Median Voter Theorem is shown to hold; however, this is not found under weak fuzzy preferences.

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

Access this chapter

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 PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Banerjee, A.: Fuzzy preferences and Arrow-type problems. Social Choice and Welfare 11, 121–130 (1994)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Billot, A.: Economic theory of fuzzy equilibria: an axiomatic analysis. Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems. Springer (1992), http://books.google.com/books?id=ml-7AAAAIAAJ

  3. Dasgupta, M., Deb, R.: An impossibility theorem with fuzzy preferences. In: Logic, Game Theory and Social Choice: Proceedings of the International Conference, LGS, vol. 99, pp. 13–16 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Duddy, C., Perote-Peña, J., Piggins, A.: Arrow’s theorem and max-star transitivity. Social Choice and Welfare 36(1), 25–34 (2011), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00355-010-0461-x

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Dutta, B.: Fuzzy preferences and social choice. Mathematical Social Sciences 13(3), 215–229 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Fono, L.A., Andjiga, N.G.: Fuzzy strict preference and social choice. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 155, 372–389 (2005), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2005.05.001

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fono, L.A., Donfack-Kommogne, V., Andjiga, N.G.: Fuzzy Arrow-type results without the pareto principle based on fuzzy pre-orders. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 160(18), 2658–2672 (2009)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Mordeson, J.N., Clark, T.D.: Fuzzy Arrow’s theorem. New Mathematics and Natural Computation 5(2), 371–383 (2009), http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1793005709001362

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Richardson, G.: The structure of fuzzy preferences: Social choice implications. Social Choice and Welfare 15, 359–369 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael B. Gibilisco .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gibilisco, M.B., Gowen, A.M., Albert, K.E., Mordeson, J.N., Wierman, M.J., Clark, T.D. (2014). Conclusion. In: Fuzzy Social Choice Theory. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 315. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05176-5_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05176-5_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-05175-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05176-5

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics