This paper studies the welfare consequences of strategic voting in two commonly used parliamentary agendas by comparing the average utilities obtained in simulated voting under two behavioural assumptions: expected utility maximising behaviour and sincere behaviour. The average utility obtained in simulations is higher with expected utility maximising behaviour than with sincere voting behaviour under a broad range of assumptions. Strategic voting increases welfare particularly if the distribution of preference intensities correlates with voter types. © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007.
CITATION STYLE
Lehtinen, A. (2007). The welfare consequences of strategic voting in two commonly used parliamentary agendas. Theory and Decision, 63(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-007-9028-4
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.