TY - JOUR
T1 - Representing a democratic constituency in negotiations
T2 - delegation versus ratification
AU - Cardona, D.
AU - Ponsatí, C.
N1 - The authors acknowledge financial support from the Generalitat de Catalunya through grant SGR2009-1051, and from the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad through grants ECO2009-08820 and ECO2012-34046
PY - 2015/9
Y1 - 2015/9
N2 - We consider negotiations where one of the parties is a group that must send a representative to the bargaining table. We examine the trade-offs that the group faces in choosing between two different regimes for this representation: (i) Delegation where the representative is granted full authority to reach an agreement, and (ii) Ratification, where any agreement reached by the representative requires a posterior ratification vote. We show that when the group has flexibility—to select the delegate or to set the majority threshold for ratification—the majority of the group favors delegation. Only when the flexibility is limited or delegates are (sufficiently) unreliable will the majority of the group prefer ratification.
AB - We consider negotiations where one of the parties is a group that must send a representative to the bargaining table. We examine the trade-offs that the group faces in choosing between two different regimes for this representation: (i) Delegation where the representative is granted full authority to reach an agreement, and (ii) Ratification, where any agreement reached by the representative requires a posterior ratification vote. We show that when the group has flexibility—to select the delegate or to set the majority threshold for ratification—the majority of the group favors delegation. Only when the flexibility is limited or delegates are (sufficiently) unreliable will the majority of the group prefer ratification.
U2 - 10.1007/s00355-015-0895-2
DO - 10.1007/s00355-015-0895-2
M3 - Article
SN - 0176-1714
VL - 45
SP - 399
EP - 414
JO - Social Choice and Welfare
JF - Social Choice and Welfare
IS - 2
ER -