Bøker av Peter C. Ordeshook

Formal political theory seeks to develop formal, mathematical models of political and economic processes. This book attempts to integrate the last twenty years of development in this field. Professor Ordeshook uses the modern developments in the theory of games (decision making with multiple, interactive decision makers) as the basis for the synthesis. Topics covered include models of elections and of committee processes, the demand and supply of public goods, and surveys of game theory and social-choice theory. Game Theory and Political Theory is designed as a textbook for graduate courses in formal political theory and political economy.

Introduces students to the application of game theory to modeling political processes.

An introduction to game theory and its application to the study of politics, designed by a leading authority for students without advanced mathematical training.

This book uses the tools of game theory to develop a comprehensive theory of anarchic systems.

This volume offers a number of forensic indicators of election fraud applied to official election returns, and tests and illustrates their application in Russia and Ukraine. Included are the methodology's econometric details and theoretical assumptions. The applications to Russia include the analysis of all federal elections between 1996 and 2007 and, for Ukraine, between 2004 and 2007. Generally, we find that fraud has metastasized within the Russian polity during Putin's administration with upwards of 10 million or more suspect votes in both the 2004 and 2007 balloting, whereas in Ukraine, fraud has diminished considerably since the second round of its 2004 presidential election where between 1.5 and 3 million votes were falsified. The volume concludes with a consideration of data from the United States to illustrate the dangers of the application of our methods without due consideration of an election's substantive context and the characteristics of the data at hand.

Because of the redistributive nature of institutions and the availability of implementable alternatives with different distributive consequences, the desire of federation members to change institutional specifics in their favor is a permanent feature of the federal political process. This is so for two reasons. First, states or their equivalents in democratic federations usually can succeed in renegotiating the rules if they feel sufficiently motivated to do so. Second, in the case of a federation it is more or less clear who stands to benefit from any change in institutions. Thus, the existence of an equilibrium of constitutional legitimacy at the popular and elite levels cannot be taken for granted. The authors show that the presence in the political process of agents who are 'naturally committed' to the status-quo institutional arrangement can suffice to coordinate voters to act as if they support existing constitutional arrangements.