Positionality-Weighted Aggregation Methods for Cumulative Voting

Respecting minority opinions is vital in solving social problems. However, minority opinions are often ignored in general majority rules. To build consensus on pluralistic values and make social choices that consider minority opinions, we propose aggregation methods that give weighting to the minority's positionality on cardinal cumulative voting. Based on quadratic and linear voting, we formulated three weighted aggregation methods that differ in the ratio of votes to cumulative points and the weighting of the minority to all members, and assuming that the distributions of votes follow normal distributions, we calculated the frequency distributions of the aggregation results. We found that minority opinions are more likely to be reflected proportionately to the average of the distribution in two of the above three methods. This implies that Sen and Gotoh's idea of considering the social position of unfortunate people on ordinal ranking in the welfare economics, was illustrated by weighting the minority's positionality on cardinal voting. In addition, it is possible to visualize the number and positionality of the minority from the analysis of the aggregation results. These results will be useful to promote mutual understanding between the majority and minority by interactively visualizing the contents of the proposed aggregation methods in the consensus-building process. With the further development of information technology, the consensus building based on big data will be necessary. We recommend the use of our proposed aggregation methods to make social choices for pluralistic values such as social, environmental, and economic.

The Paradox of the Thai Middle Class in Democratisation

The relationship of the bourgeoisie and democratisation has been inconsistent across the history of democracy. This work offers an alternative explanation taking the example of the Thai middle class, which had promoted democracy, turned against it. From the democratic transition of 1973 until the present day, the Thai middle class has played contradictory roles in the democratisation of the country. This work investigates the effects of democratic institution-building after regime change and the efforts to consolidate democracy in the middle class. This work proposes two major observations. The first is the failure of the middle class to establish themselves in democratic institutions and processes in either the legislature/executive, political parties, local government or structured interest groups. They have learned of the uncertainty of free elections and how the elected executives have benefitted other classes but not them. The second regards the missing prerequisite of democracy. Insufficient understanding of majority rules and two-turnover elections, caused the middle class who were disappointed with the outcome of democratic regimes and systems to easily turn away from democracy.

Voting in corporations

I introduce a model of shareholder voting. I describe and provide characterizations of three families of shareholder voting rules: ratio rules, difference rules, and share majority rules. The characterizations rely on two key axioms: merger consistency, which requires consistency in voting outcomes following stock‐for‐stock mergers, and reallocation invariance, which requires the shareholder voting rule to be immune to certain manipulative techniques used by shareholders to hide their ownership. The paper also extends May's theorem.

A model and the behavioral implications of the calculus of consent: The dilemma of public choice before public choice

The choice of a group decision-making rule is one of the most important political issues. Buchanan and Tullock have provided a framework for analyzing the optimal k-majority rule from the perspective of “methodological individualism.” They proposed the concept of “external costs” and “decision costs” and argued that the optimal k-majority rule takes place where the sum of these two costs–“total costs”–is minimized. Despite the fact that the approach is widely accepted as a tool for dealing with public decision-making rules, the study of formalizing these two costs in a quantitative manner has been relatively rare. We propose a systematic way of modeling these costs considering the assumptions mentioned by Buchanan and Tullock. We find that the resulting shape of the graphs is generally similar to that of the Buchanan-Tullock model, except for some minor details. Then, using this analytical model, we investigate several factors that could affect Buchanan-Tullock’s two costs and the optimal k-majority rule. We show that “clustering of disadvantages” (social factor) and “loss aversion” (personal factor) could increase external costs in Buchanan-Tullock’s model. These factors can result in a separation between the theoretical and actual optimal k-majority rules. Meanwhile, some recent developments in information and communication technologies can not only decrease decision costs, but also increase the same costs simultaneously through amplified “group polarization” (technological factor). If the effect of the former is not the same as that of the latter, this leads to a difference in optimal k-majority rules as well. These discrepancies bring us to the dilemma of “public choice before public choice.”