Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/5664
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDowding, KM-
dc.date.accessioned2011-07-28T13:15:47Z-
dc.date.available2011-07-28T13:15:47Z-
dc.date.issued1990-
dc.identifier.citationSchool of Social Sciences, Department of Government, Working Paper No. 10, 1990-
dc.identifier.isbn1-872166-70-9-
dc.identifier.urihttp://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/5664-
dc.description.abstractPeter Morriss's logical ability/ableness distinction breaks down under analysis but a similar normative distinction is important for understanding power and liberty. The breakdown is demonstrated under the test case of the power of a pivotal voter in a committee. Brian Barry argues that a pivotal voter has power as ableness not ability, but the paper demonstrates that a pivotal voter has neither. Under standard measures the 'power' of the pivot is due to the chance ordering of all committee members' preference schedules. Rather than power, each has a resource which, when certain conditions obtain, can be powerfully utilized. The power of the pivot depends upon the realization that those conditions obtain thus the power index literature requires modification.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBrunel University-
dc.titleAbleness and ability: Morriss on power and counteractualsen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
Appears in Collections:The Brunel Collection
Brunel Law School Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fulltext.pdf2.05 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.