Skip to main content
Log in

Anonymity and neutrality in Arrow’s Theorem with restricted coalition algebras

  • Published:
Social Choice and Welfare Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract.

 In the very general setting of Armstrong (1980) for Arrow’s Theorem, I show two results. First, in an infinite society, Anonymity is inconsistent with Unanimity and Independence if and only if a domain for social welfare functions satisfies a modest condition of richness. While Arrow’s axioms can be satisfied, unequal treatment of individuals thus persists. Second, Neutrality is consistent with Unanimity (and Independence). However, there are both dictatorial and nondictatorial social welfare functions satisfying Unanimity and Independence but not Neutrality. In Armstrong’s setting, one can naturally view Neutrality as a stronger condition of informational simplicity than Independence.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Received: 11 August 1994/Accepted: 1 April 1996

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mihara, H. Anonymity and neutrality in Arrow’s Theorem with restricted coalition algebras. Soc Choice Welfare 14, 503–512 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/s003550050083

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s003550050083

Keywords

Navigation