Elections with partially ordered preferences

Suppose an organization has a committee with multiple seats, and the committee members are to be elected by a group of voters. For the organization, the possible alternatives are the possible sets of individuals who could serve together. A common approach is to choose from among these alternatives by having each voter cast separate votes on the candidates for each seat. When this type of ballot is used, important characteristics of the set of individuals on the committee (such as what percentage of the members will be female) might not be explicitly considered by the voters. Another approach that has been used is to have each voter cast a ballot which ranks all possible sets of members. However, this approach can require the voters to weigh a relatively large number of alternatives. This paper considers group decisions where it is desirable to: (1) explicitly consider characteristics of alternatives and (2) have a relatively small number of options upon which a voter has to express his preferences. The approach that we propose has two steps: First voters vote directly on pertinent characteristics of alternatives; Then these votes are used to indirectly specify preferences on alternatives. The indirectly specified preferences are ones that are naturally modeled using partially ordered sets. We identify some specific methods that could be applied in the second step. In addition, by replacing the indirectly specified preferences in a suitable way, we suggest a technique that can use any positional, pairwise, or other voting method that accepts totally (or “completely”) ordered inputs to tally ballots. We also describe another way to potentially compute pairwise rankings from partially ordered alternatives and discuss some practical and theoretical difficulties associated with our approach.     

Examining the Impact of Duration,Connection, and Dosage of Domestic Violence Services on Survivor Well-Being

Journal of Family Violence - Survivors of domestic violence (DV) have a wide range of needs when they seek help from DV programs. While there is growing evidence that advocacy and other supportive...     

Finding the Way Forward for the International Arrangement on Forests: UNFF-5, -6 and -7

International forest policy negotiations have often been characterized by political entrenchment: as early as at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro there was a failure to develop a legally binding forest convention, and subsequent policy fora have often struggled to reach consensus. During its fifth annual session in 2005, the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) began to show signs of a process in deep trouble, failing to achieve agreement on even the most innocuous voluntary commitments. At its sixth session in 2006, the Forum was successful in that members were able to agree on four 'global objectives on forests' and initiated the negotiation of a non-legally binding instrument. While this is a cause for optimism, it remains unclear whether the process is completely out of the woods yet or where it is likely to go from here. This article will identify the obstacles to consensus that the UNFF has encountered and discuss whether the most recent session has managed to surmount these. Finally, options to increase future political support and member accountability are presented, including increasing participation in national reporting and reinvigorating the Forum's programme of work.