This paper proposes a unified framework that integrates the traditional index-based
approach and the competing non-cooperative approach to power analysis. It rests on a
quantifiable notion of ex post power as the (counter-factual) sensitivity of the
expected or observed outcome to individual players. Thus, it formalizes
players’ marginal impact on outcomes in both cooperative and
non-cooperative games, for both strategic interaction as well as purely random
behavior. By taking expectations with respect to preferences, actions, and
procedures, one obtains meaningful measures of ex ante power. Established power
indices turn out to be special cases.
Baldwin, Richard
,
Erik Berglof
,
Francesco Giavazzi
and
Mika Widgren
(2000) ‘The EU Reforms for Tomorrow’s
Europe’, CEPR Discussion Paper 2623,
London
.
2.
Baldwin, Richard
,
Erik Berglof
,
Francesco Giavazzi
and
Mika Widgren
(2001) ‘Nice Try: Should the Treaty of Nice Be
Ratified?’, Monitoring European Integration Vol.11.
London: Centre for Economic Policy Research
.
3.
Barry, Brian
(1980a)
‘Is It better to Be Powerful or Lucky? - Part 1’
, Political Studies28:
183-194
.
4.
Barry, Brian
(1980b)
‘Is It better to Be Powerful or Lucky? - Part 2’
, Political Studies28:
338-352
.
5.
Berg, Sven
and
Jan-Erik Lane
(1999)
‘Relevance of Voting Power’
, Journal of Theoretical Politics11:
309-320
.
6.
Bossert, Walter
,
Steven J. Brams
and
D. Marc Kilgour
(2002)
‘Cooperative vs. Non-cooperative Truels: Little Agreement, But
Does That Matter?’
, Games and Economic Behavior40:
185-202
.
7.
Braham, Matthew
and
Manfred J. Holler
(2003) ‘The Impossibility of a Preference-based
Power Index’, Discussion Paper No. 130.
Hamburg: Sozialokonomisches Seminar der
Universitat Hamburg, University of Hamburg
.
8.
Brams, Steven J.
and
Paul Affuso
(1985a)
‘New Paradoxes of Voting Power in the EU Council of Ministers’
, Electoral Studies4:
135-139
.
9.
Brams, Steven J.
and
Paul Affuso
(1985b)
‘Addendum To: New Paradoxes of Voting Power in the EU Council of Ministers’
, Electoral Studies4:
290
.
10.
Coleman, James S.
(1966)
‘Foundations for a Theory of Collective Decisions’
, American Journal of Sociology71:
616-627
.
11.
Cooter, Robert
(2002) ‘Median Democracy’, Mimeo,
School of Law, University of California at Berkeley
.
12.
Crombez, Cristophe
(1996)
‘Legislative Procedures in the European Community’
, British Journal of Political Science26:
199-228
.
13.
Crombez, Cristophe
(1997)
‘The Co-decision Procedure in the European Union’
, Legislative Studies Quarterly22:
97-119
.
14.
Dowding, Keith
(2000)
‘Institutionalist Research on the European Union - A Critical Review’
, European Union Politics1:
125-144
.
15.
Felsenthal, Dan
and
Moshe Machover
(1998) The Measurement of Voting Power: Theory and Practice,
Problems and Paradoxes.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
.
16.
Felsenthal, Dan
and
Moshe Machover
(2001a)
‘Myths and Meanings of Voting Power’
, Journal of Theoretical Politics13:
81-87
.
17.
Felsenthal, Dan
and
Moshe Machover
(2001b)
‘The Treaty of Nice and Qualified Majority Voting’
, Social Choice and Welfare18:
431-464
.
18.
Freixas, Josep
, and
William S. Zwicker
(2003)
‘Weighted Voting, Abstention, and Multiple Levels of Approval’
, Social Choice and Welfare21:
399-431
.
19.
Fudenberg, Drew
and
David K. Levine
(1998) The Theory of Learning in Games.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
.
20.
Garrett, Geoffrey
and
George Tsebelis
(1996)
‘An Institutional Critique of Inter-Governmentalism’
, International Organization50:
269-299
.
21.
Garrett, Geoffrey
and
George Tsebelis
(1999a)
‘Why Resist the Temptation to Apply Power Indices to the EU’
, Journal of Theoretical Politics11:
291-308
.
22.
Garrett, Geoffrey
and
George Tsebelis
(1999b)
‘More Reasons to Resist the Temptation to Apply Power Indices to
the EU’
, Journal of Theoretical Politics11:
331-338
.
23.
Garrett, Geoffrey
and
George Tsebelis
(2001)
‘Even More Reasons to Resist the Temptation to Apply Power
Indices to the EU’
, Journal of Theoretical Politics13:
99-105
.
24.
Grofman, Bernard
,
Guillermo Owen
,
Nicholas Noviello
and
Amihai Glazer
(1987)
‘Stability and Centrality of Legislative Choice in the Spatial Context’
, American Political Science Review81:
539-552
.
Hansson, Sven Ove
(1996)
‘Social Choice with Procedural Preferences’
, Social Choice and Welfare13:
215-230
.
27.
Hart, Sergiu
and
Andrev Mas-Colell
(1996)
‘Bargaining and Value’
, Econometrica64:
357-380
.
28.
Holler, Manfred
and
Mika Widgren
(1999)
‘Why Power Indices for Assessing EU Decision-Making?‘Journal of Theoretical Politics11:
321-330
.
29.
Hosli, Madeleine
(1993)
‘Admission of European Free Trade Association States to the
European Community: Effects on Voting Power in the European
Community’s Council of Ministers’
, International Organization47:
629-643
.
30.
Hosli, Madeleine
(2002)
‘Preferences and Power in the European Union’
, Homo Oeconomicus19:
311-326
.
31.
Kirman, Alan
and
Mika Widgren
(1995)
‘European Economic Decision-making Policy: Progress or Paralysis?’
, Economic Policy21:
421-460
.
32.
Laruelle, Annick
and
Mika Widgren
(1998)
‘Is the Allocation of Power Among EU States Fair?’
, Public Choice94:
317-339
.
33.
Laruelle, Annick
and
Valenciano, Federico
(2002) ‘Assessment of Voting Situations: The
Probabilistic Foundations’, Discussion Paper No. 26/2002,
Departamento de Economia Aplicada IV, Basque Country
University, Bilbao, Spain
.
34.
Leech, Dennis
(2002)
‘Designing the Voting System for the Council of Ministers of the
European Union’
, Public Choice113:
437-464
.
35.
Moser, Peter
(1996)
‘The European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter: What Are
the Conditions? A Critique of Garrett and Tsebelis (1994)’
, American Political Science Review90:
834-838
.
36.
Moser, Peter
(1997)
‘A Theory of the Conditional Influence of the European Parliament
in the Cooperation Procedure’
, Public Choice91:
333-350
.
37.
Napel, Stefan
, and
Mika Widgren
(2001)
‘Inferior Players in Simple Games’
, International Journal of Game Theory30:
209-220
.
38.
Napel, Stefan
and
Mika Widgren
(2002) ‘Strategic Power Revisited’,
CESifo Working Paper No. 736.
Munich: CESifo
.
39.
Napel, Stefan
and
Mika Widgren
(2003) ‘EU Conciliation Committee: Council 56 vs.
Parliament 6’, CEPR Discussion Paper No. 4071.
London: CEPR
.
40.
Nurmi, Hannu
(1998) Rational Behavior and the Design of
Institutions.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
.
Owen, Guillermo
(1995) Game Theory.
San Diego, CA: Academic Press
.
43.
Owen, Guillermo
and
Lloyd S. Shapley
(1989)
‘Optimal Location of Candidates in Ideological Space’
, International Journal of Game Theory18:
339-356
.
44.
Penrose, Lionel
(1946)
‘The Elementary Statistics of Majority Voting’
, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society109:
53-57
.
45.
Samuelson, Larry
(1997) Evolutionary Games and Equilibrium Selection.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
.
46.
Selten, Reinhard
(1975)
‘Re-examination of the Perfectness Concept for Equilibrium’
, International Journal of Game Theory4:
25-55
.
47.
Shapley, Lloyd
(1953) ‘A Value for n-person Cooperative
Games’, in
Harold Kuhn
and
Al Tucker
(eds) Contributions to the Theory of Games (Annals of Mathematical
Studies 28), pp. 307-317.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
48.
Shapley, Lloyd
and
Martin Shubik
(1954)
‘A Method of Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System’
, American Political Science Review48:
787-792
.
49.
Steunenberg, Bernard
(1994)
‘Decision-Making under Different Institutional Arrangements:
Legislation by the European Community’
, Journal of Theoretical and Institutional Economics150:
642-669
.
50.
Steunenberg, Bernard
,
Dieter Schmidtchen
and
Christian Koboldt
(1999)
‘Strategic Power in the European Union: Evaluating the
Distribution of Power in Policy Games’
, Journal of Theoretical Politics11:
339-366
.
51.
Steunenberg, Bernard
and
Dieter Schmidtchen
(2002) ‘The Strategic Power Index -
Responses’, Mimeo.
52.
Straffin, Philip D.
(1977)
‘Homogeneity, Independence and Power Indices’
, Public Choice30:
107-118
.
53.
Straffin, Philip D.
(1978) ‘Probability Models for Power
Indices’, in
Peter C. Ordeshook
(ed.) Game Theory and Political Science.
New York, NY: New York University Press
.
54.
Straffin, Philip D.
(1988) ‘The Shapley-Shubik and Banzhaf Power
Indices as Probabilities’, in
Alvin E. Roth
(ed.) The Shapley Value: Essays in Honor of Lloyd Shapley.
Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press
.
55.
Tsebelis, George
(1994)
‘The European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter’
, American Political Science Review88:
128-142
.
56.
Tsebelis, George
(1996)
‘More on the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter:
Response to Moser’
, American Political Science Review90:
839-844
.
57.
Tsebelis, George
and
Geoffrey Garrett
(1997) ‘Why Power Indices Cannot Explain
Decision-Making in the European Union’, in
Dieter Schmidtchen
and
Robert Cooter
(eds) Constitutional Law and Economics of the European Union.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
.
58.
van den Brink, Rene
(2001) ‘Banzhaf Permission Values for Games with a
Permission Structure’, Technical Report 341,
Department of Mathematics, University of Texas at Arlington
.
59.
Widgren, Mika
(1994)
‘Voting Power in the EU and the Consequences of Two Different Enlargements’
, European Economic Review38:
1153-1170
.
60.
Widgren, Mika
(1995)
‘Probabilistic Voting Power in the EU Council: The Cases of Trade
Policy and Social Regulation’
, Scandinavian Journal of Economics97:
345-356
.
61.
Widgren, Mika
and
Stefan Napel
(2002)
‘The Power of a Spatially Inferior Player’
, Homo Oeconomicus19:
327-343
.
62.
Young, H. Peyton
(1998) Individual Strategy and Social Structure: An
Evolutionary Theory of Institutions.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
