TY - JOUR
T1 - Social choice theory and deliberative democracy
T2 - A reconciliation
AU - Dryzek, John S.
AU - List, Christian
PY - 2003/1
Y1 - 2003/1
N2 - The two most influential traditions of contemporary theorizing about democracy, social choice theory and deliberative democracy are generally thought to be at loggerheads, in that one demonstrates the impossibility, instability or meaninglessness of the rational collective outcomes sought by the other. We argue that the two traditions can be reconciled. After expounding the central Arrow and Gibbard-Satterthwaite impossibility results, we reassess their implications, identifying the conditions under which meaningful democratic decision making is possible. We argue that deliberation can promote these conditions, and hence that social choice theory suggests not that democratic decision making is impossible, but rather that democracy must have a deliberative aspect.
AB - The two most influential traditions of contemporary theorizing about democracy, social choice theory and deliberative democracy are generally thought to be at loggerheads, in that one demonstrates the impossibility, instability or meaninglessness of the rational collective outcomes sought by the other. We argue that the two traditions can be reconciled. After expounding the central Arrow and Gibbard-Satterthwaite impossibility results, we reassess their implications, identifying the conditions under which meaningful democratic decision making is possible. We argue that deliberation can promote these conditions, and hence that social choice theory suggests not that democratic decision making is impossible, but rather that democracy must have a deliberative aspect.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037277275&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/S0007123403000012
DO - 10.1017/S0007123403000012
M3 - Review article
SN - 0007-1234
VL - 33
SP - 1
EP - 28
JO - British Journal of Political Science
JF - British Journal of Political Science
IS - 1
ER -