Arrow's impossibility theorem:
In an attempt to construct a consistent social ranking of a set of alternatives on the basis of individual preferences over this set, Arrow obtained:
1) an impossibility theorem;
2) a generalisation of the framework of welfare economics, covering all collective decisions from political democracy and committee decisions to market allocation; and
3) an axiomatic method which sets a standard of rigour for any future endeavour.
Prof. Arrow pointed out that the construction of social welfare function, which reflects the preferences of all individuals comprising the society, is an impossible task. His main contention is that it is vefy difficult to set up reasonable democratic procedure for the aggregation of individual preferences into a social preference for making a social choice. Arrow has proved & general theorem according to which it is impossible to consmct a social ordering which will in some way reflect the individual ordering of all the members of society.
While constructing his argument, Arrow has maintained that individual's ordering of social states does not depend exclusively upon the commodities consumed but also on the amounts of various types of collectives such as municipal services, parks, sanitation, erection of statues of famous men, etc. In other words, an individual solely on the basis of her consumption cannot evaluate welfare results of collective activity; instead, individual ordering of social states will depend on her own consumption as well as on the consumption of others in a society. Individual ordering of alternative social states reflects her value judgments, which are also called simply 'values7 by Arrow. According to him, it is ordering of social states according to the values
of individuals as distinct from the individual tastes, which should be determined for the construction of valid social welfare function.
The theorem's content, somewhat simplified, is as follows: A society needs to agree on a preference order among several different options. Each individual in the society has a particular personal preference order. The problem is to find a general mechanism, called a social choice function, which transforms the set of preference orders, one for each individual, into a global societal preference order. This social choice function should have several desirable ("fair") properties:
- Unrestricted domain or universality: the social choice function should create a deterministic, complete societal preference order from every possible set of individual preference orders. (The vote must have a result that ranks all possible choices relative to one another, the voting mechanism must be able to process all possible sets of voter preferences, and it should always give the same result for the same votes, without random selection.)
- Non-imposition or citizen sovereignty: every possible societal preference order should be achievable by some set of individual. preference orders. (Every result must be achievable somehow.)
- Non-dictatorship: the social choice function should not simply follow the preference order of a single individual while ignoring all others.
- Positive association of social and individual values or Monotonicity: if an individual modifies her preference order by promoting a certain option, then the societal preference order should respond only by promoting that same option or not changing, never by placing it lower than before. (An individual should not be able to hurt an option by ranking it higher.)
- Independence of relevant tenatives: if we restrict attention to a subset of options, and apply the social choice function only to those, then the result should be compatible with the outcome for the whole set of options. (Changes in individuals' rankings of "irrelevant" alternatives [i.e., ones outside the subset] should have no impact on the societal ranking of the "relevant" subset.)