Constitutional Design, Democratic Mechanisms, and New Collective Decision Rules

We investigate how democratic constitutions can be designed to achieve an efficient provision of public projects. In particular, we analyze a variety of new types of decision and agenda rules that have been invented by our chair. Examples:

  • Flexible majority rules: The size of the majority needed depends on the proposal made by the agenda setter.
  • Two-stage unanimity rules: In the first stage, voters decide on a broad package of public projects; if the package is rejected, only voting about single projects is allowed.
  • Flexible agenda costs: The costs for agenda-setting depend on the number of supporting votes.
  • Rotating agenda setting and agenda repetition in combination with flexible majority rules.
  • Minority voting: Only the losing minority of one period keeps the voting right for the collective decision in the next period.
  • Balanced voting: Citizens may abstain from voting on a fundamental direction in a first stage. In a second voting stage, this guarantees them a voting right on the variations of the fundamental direction chosen in the first.
  • Assessment voting: Before the conclusive voting, a given number of randomly-chosen voters cast their votes. Once the results of the first round are published, the initiative group has the possibility to withdraw its proposal.

Publications

Columns / Policy Briefs

Working Papers

Team Members

Cooperation Partners

JavaScript has been disabled in your browser