Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Public Choice: An Introduction

  • Chapter
The Encyclopedia of Public Choice

Abstract

Public Choice has been defined as the application of the methodology of economics to the study of politics. This definition suggests that public choice is an inherently interdisciplinary field, and so it is. Depending upon which person one selects as making the pioneering contribution to public choice, it came into existence either in the late 18th century as an offshoot of mathematics, or in the late 1940s as an offshoot of economics. The case for the earlier date rests on the existence of publications by two French mathematicians, Jean-Charles de Borda (1781) and the Marquis de Condorcet (1785). Condorcet was the first person, as far as we know, to discover the problem of cycling, the possibility when using the simple majority rule that an alternative x can lose to y in a vote between the two, y can lose to another alternative z, but z will also lose to x. The existence of such a possibility obviously raises the issue of how a community can decide among these three alternatives, when a cycle exists, and what the normative justification for any choice made will be. No cycle exists, of course, if some alternative, say y, can defeat both x and z. The literature has commemorated Condorcet’s contribution by naming such an issue like y a Condorcet winner. A vast number of papers and books have analyzed both the normative and positive implications of the existence of cycles.

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 429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 549.99
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

  • Alt, James E. (1999). “Obituary: thoughts on Mancur Olson’s contribution to political science.” Public Choice, 98: 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J. (1950). “A difficulty in the concept of social welfare.” Journal of Political Economy, 58: 328–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J. (1951). Social Choice and Individual Values. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, Duncan (1948a). “On the rationale of group decision making.” Journal of Political Economy, 56: 23–34; reprinted in K.J. Arrow and T. Scitovsky (eds.) (1969) 133–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, Duncan (1948b). “The decisions of a committee using a special majority.” Econometrica, 16: 245–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, Duncan (1958). The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borda, Jean-Charles de (1781). Memoire sur les Elections au Scrutin. Paris: Histoire de l’Academie Royale des Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, Howard R. (1943). “The interpretation of voting in the allocation of economic resources.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 58: 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breton, Albert. (1996). Competitive Governments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, James M. (1949). “The pure theory of government finance: a suggested approach.” Journal of Political Economy, 57: 496–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, James M. and Gordon Tullock (1962). The Calculus of Consent. Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Edward H. (1971). “Multipart pricing of public goods.” Public Choice, 11: 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Condorcet, Marquis de (1785). Essai sur l’Application de L’Analyse à la Probabilité des Décisions Rendues à la Pluraliste des Voix. Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coughlin, Peter and Shmuel Nitzan (1981a) “Electoral outcomes with probabilistic voting and nash social welfare maxima.” Journal of Public Economics, 15: 113–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coughlin, Peter and Shmuel Nitzan (1981b) “Directional and local electoral equilibria with probabilistic voting.” Journal of Economic Theory, 24: 226–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodgson, Charles L. (1876). A Method of Taking Votes on More than Two Issues; reprinted in Black (ed.) (1958) 224–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, Anthony (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drazen, Allan (2000). Political Economy in Macroeconomics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, Bruno S. and Friedrich Schneider (1978a) “An empirical study of politico-economic interaction in the U.S..” Review of Economics and Statistics, 60: 174–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, Bruno S. and Friedrich Schneider (1978b). “A politico-economic model of the United Kingdom.” Economic Journal, 88: 243–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frohlich, Norman and Joe A. Oppenheimer (1992). Choosing Justice: An Experimental Approach to Ethical Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frohlich, Norman, Joe A. Oppenheimer, and Cheryl L. Eavey (1987). “Laboratory results on Rawls’s distributive justice.” British Journal of Political Science, 17: 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbard, Allan (1977). “Manipulation of schemes that combine voting with chance.” Econometrica, 45: 665–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, Theodore (1973). “Incentives in teams.” Econometrica, 41: 617–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, Theodore and John J. Ledyard (1977). “Optimal allocation of public goods: a solution to the ‘free rider’ problem.” Econometrica, 45: 783–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A. Jr. (1977). “Political parties and macroeconomic policy.” American Political Science Review, 71: 1467–1487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A. Jr. (1987). The Political Economy of Industrial Democracies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, Elizabeth (1997). “Public choice experiments,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 415–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, Elizabeth and Matthew L. Spitzer (1982). “The coase theorem: some experimental tests.” Journal of Law and Economics, 25: 73–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotelling, Harold (1929). “Stability in competition.” Economic Journal, 39: 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hylland, Aanund and Richard Zeckhauser (1970). “A mechanism for selecting public goods when preferences must be elicited.” KSG Discussion Paper 70D, Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, Gerald H. (1971). “Short run fluctuations in U.S. voting behavior, 1896–1964.” American Political Science Review, 65: 131–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, Anne O. (1974). “The political economy of the rent-seeking society.” American Economic Review, 64(3): 291–303; reprinted in J.M. Buchanan, R.D. Tollison, and G. Tullock (eds.) (1980) 51–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laver, Michael and Norman Schofield (1990). Multiparty Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledyard, John O. (1984). “The pure theory of large two-candidate elections.” Public Choice, 44(1): 7–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledyard, John O. (1995). “Public goods: a survey of experimental research,” in J.H. Kagel and A.E. Roth (eds.) The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 111–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacRae, C. Duncan (1977). “A political model of the business cycle.” Journal of Political Economy, 85: 239–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magee, Stephen P. (1997). “Endogenous protection: the empirical evidence,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 526–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marwell, G. and Ames, R.E. (1979). “Experiments on the provision of public goods I: resources, interest, group size, and the free rider problem.” American Journal of Sociology, 84: 1335–1360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marwell, G. and Ames, R.E. (1980). “Experiments on the provision of public goods II: provision points, stakes, experience and the free rider problem.” American Journal of Sociology, 85: 926–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, Richard D. (1976). “Intransitivities in multidimensional voting models and some implications for agenda control.” Journal of Economic Theory, 12: 472–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, Richard D. (1986). “Covering, dominance, and institution-free properties of social choice.” American Journal of Political Science, 30: 283–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mill, John Stuart. (1861). Considerations on Representative Government. New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Nicholas R. (1980). “A new solution set for tournaments and majority voting: further graph-theoretical approaches to the theory of voting.” American Journal of Political Science, 24: 68–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Nicholas R. (1983). “The covering relation in tournaments: two corrections.” American Journal of Political Science, 27: 382–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moe, Terry M. (1997). “The positive theory of public bureaucracy,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 455–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Dennis C. (1978). “Voting by veto.” Journal of Public Economics, 10: 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Dennis C. (1984). “Voting by veto and majority rule.” in Horst Hanusch (ed.) Public Finance and the Quest for Efficiency. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, pp. 69–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Dennis C. (2003). Public Choice III. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Wolfgang C. and Kaare Strøm (2000). “Coalition governance in Western Europe,” in W.C. Müller and K. Strøm (eds.) Coalition Governments in Western Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 559–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niskanen, William A. Jr. (1971). Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, William D. (1975). “The political business cycle.” Review of Economic Studies, 42: 169–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, Mancur, Jr. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, Elinor and James Walker (1997). “Neither markets nor states: linking transformation processes in collective action areas,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 35–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paldam, Martin (1997). “Political business cycles,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 342–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, Richard A. (1975). “The social costs of monopoly and regulation.” Journal of Political Economy. 83: 807–827; reprinted in J.M. Buchanan, R.D. Tollison, and G. Tullock (eds.) (1980) 71–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, John A. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, William H. (1962). The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, William H. (1982). Liberalism Against Populism. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Paul A. (1954). “The pure theory of public expenditure.” Review of Economics and Statistics, 36: 386–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saari, Donald G. (1994). Geometry of Voting. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Satterthwaite, M.A. (1975). “Strategy-proofness and arrow’s conditions: existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions.” Journal of Economic Theory, 10: 187–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, Norman (1978). “Instability of simple dynamic games.” Review of Economic Studies, 45: 575–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, Norman (1997). “Multiparty electoral politics,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 271–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 3rd edn, 1950. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, Amartya (1970). “The impossibility of a paretian liberal.” Journal of Political Economy, 78: 152–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, Amartya (1996). “Rights: formulation and consequences.” Analyse & Kritik, 18: 153–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Vernon L. (1979). “An experimental comparison of three public good decision mechanisms.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 81(2): 198–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Michael J. and Herman, V.M. (1971). “Party systems and government stability.” American Political Science Review, 65: 28–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tollison, Robert D. (1997). “Rent seeking,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 506–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, Gordon. (1967). “The welfare costs of tariffs, monopolies and theft.” Western Economic Journal, 5: 224–232; reprinted in Buchanan, Tollison and Tullock (eds.) (1980) 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Roozendaal, Peter (1990). “Centre parties and coalition formations: a game theoretic approach.” European Journal of Political Research, 18: 325–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Roozendaal, Peter (1992). “The effect of dominant and central parties on cabinet composition and durability.” Legal Studies Quarterly, 17: 5–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Roozendaal, Peter (1993). “Cabinets in the Netherlands (1918–1990): the importance of ‘dominant’ and ‘central’ parties.” European Journal of Political Research, 23: 35–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickrey, William (1961). “Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders.” Journal of Finance, 16: 8–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, H. Peyton (1997). “Group choice and individual judgements,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 201–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicksell, Knut (1896). “Ein neues Prinzip der gerechten Besteuerung.” Finanztheoretische Untersuchungen, Jena; translated as “A New Principle of Just Taxation,” 1958; reprinted in (1967) Richard A. Musgrave, and Alan T. Peacock (eds.) Classics in the Theory of Public Finance. London: Macmillan, pp. 72–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wintrobe, Ronald (1997). “Modern bureaucratic theory,” in D.C. Mueller (ed.) Perspectives on Public Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 429–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittman, Donald (1995). The Myth of Democratic Failure: Why Political Institutions are Efficient. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Dennis C. Mueller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Locke Institute, George Mason University, USA

    Charles K. Rowley

  2. Institute of Economic Policy, Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria

    Friedrich Schneider

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mueller, D.C. (2004). Public Choice: An Introduction. In: Rowley, C.K., Schneider, F. (eds) The Encyclopedia of Public Choice. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47828-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47828-4_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-8607-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47828-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation