Mixed electoral system

Countries that use a mixed electoral system to elect the lower house or unicameral legislature.

A mixed electoral system is one that uses different electoral systems to elect different seats in a legislature. ^{[1] [2] [3]} Most often, this involves a winner-take-all component combined with a proportional component. ^[4] The results of the combination may be mixed-member proportional (MMP), where the overall results of the elections are proportional, ^[2] or mixed-member majoritarian, in which case the overall results are semi-proportional, retaining disproportionalities from the majoritarian component. Systems that use multiple types of combinations are sometimes called supermixed. ^[5]

Mixed-member systems also often combine local representation ^[6] (most often single-member constituencies) with regional or national (multi-member constituencies) representation, having multiple tiers. ^[7] This also means voters often elect different types of representatives who might have different types of constituencies. Some representatives may be elected by personal elections where voters vote for candidates, and some by list elections where voters vote for electoral lists of parties.

In most mixed systems, every voter can influence both the district-based and PR aspects of an election, such as under parallel voting; however, some countries have multiple coexisting electoral systems that each apply to different voters. ^{[5] [8]}

Types of mixed systems

Compensatory/non-compensatory seat allocation

A major distinction is often made between mixed compensatory systems and mixed non-compensatory systems. ^[9] In both types of systems, one set of seats is allocated using a plurality or majoritarian method, usually first past the post. The remaining seats are allocated to political parties partially or wholly based on a proportional allocation method such as highest averages or largest remainder. The difference is whether or not the results of the district elections are considered when allocating the PR seats.

In mixed non-compensatory systems, such as parallel voting, ^[10] the proportional allocation is performed independently of the district election component.

In mixed compensatory systems, the allocation of the top-up seats is done in such a way as to compensate as much as possible for dis-proportionality produced by the district elections. MMP generally produces proportional election outcomes, meaning that a political party that wins n percent of the vote will receive roughly n percent of the seats.

The following hypothetical example based on the one by Massicotte ^[10] illustrates how "top-up" PR seats are typically allocated in a compensatory system and in a non-compensatory system. The example assumes a 200-seat legislative assembly where 100 seats are filled using FPTP and the other 100 seats are awarded to parties using a form of PR. The table below gives the popular vote and FPTP results. The number of PR seats allocated to each party depends on whether the system is compensatory or non-compensatory.

Party		Popular vote	FPTP seats	PR seats	Total seats (FPTP + PR)	FPTP seats
	Party A	44%	64	?	?
	Party B	40%	33	?	?
	Party C	10%	0	?	?
	Party D	6%	3	?	?
	TOTAL	100%	100	100	200

In non compensatory system, each party wins its proportional share of the 100 PR seats. Under such a system, the total number of seats (FPTP + PR) received by each party would not be proportional to its share of the popular vote. Party A receives just slightly less of the popular vote than Party B, but receives significantly more seats. In addition to its success in the district contests, Party A receives almost as many of the PR seats as Party B.

Party		Popular vote	FPTP seats	PR seats (non-compensatory)	Total seats (FPTP + PR)	PR seats (non-compensatory)	Total seats (FPTP + PR)
	Party A	44%	64	44	108 (54% of assembly)
	Party B	40%	33	40	73 (36.5% of assembly)
	Party C	10%	0	10	10 (5% of assembly)
	Party D	6%	3	6	9 (4.5% of assembly)
	TOTAL	100%	100	100	200

If the PR seats are allocated in a compensatory system, the total number of seats awarded to each party is proportional to the party's share of the popular vote. Party B wins 33 of the district seats and its proportional share of the 200 seats being filled is 80 seats (40 percent of the total 200 seats) (the same as its share of the popular vote) so it is awarded 47 of the PR seats.

Party		Popular vote	FPTP seats	PR seats (compensatory)	Total seats (FPTP + PR)	PR seats (compensatory)	Total seats (FPTP + PR)
	Party A	44%	64	24	88 (44% of assembly)
	Party B	40%	33	47	80 (40% of assembly)
	Party C	10%	0	20	20 (10% of assembly)
	Party D	6%	3	9	12 (6% of assembly)
	TOTAL	100%	100	100	200

In practice, compensatory seat allocation is complicated by the possibility that one or more parties wins so many of the district seats ("overhang") that the available number of PR seats is insufficient to produce a fully proportional outcome. ^[11] Some mixed compensatory systems have rules that address these situations by adding additional PR seats to achieve overall PR. These seats are used only until the next election, unless needed again at that time. ^[10]

The two common ways compensation occurs are seat linkage compensation (or top-up) and vote linkage compensation (or vote transfer). ^[11] Like a non-compensatory mixed system, a compensatory mixed system may be based on the mixed single vote (voters vote for a local candidate and that vote is used to set the party share of the popular vote for the party that the candidate belongs to) or it may be based on voters casting two separate votes. ^[12]

Comparison of most common types of two-tier mixed systems by number of votes and compensation

Compensatory mixed systems
	single vote systems	dual vote systems
Seat linkage	mixed single vote, top-up versions (MSV) single vote (Lesotho)	Two vote "top-up" - broadly mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) additional member system (AMS) alternative vote plus (AV+)
		Hybrids: e.g. parallel voting+seat linkage compensation (South Korea)
Vote linkage	positive vote transfer (PVT) Hungary (local elections)	Hybrids: Parallel voting+PVT (Hungary) negative vote transfer/scorporo (Italy, 1993–2005)
	Others systems:
	dual-member proportional (DMP)	mixed ballot transferable vote (MBTV)
Non-compensatory mixed systems
	single vote systems	dual vote systems
No linkage	-	parallel voting
Vote linkage	mixed single vote, superposition Italian variant (Rosatellum)	-
Seat linkage	List seats proportional to FPTP seats Pakistan	-

Types of combinations

A diagram of a coexistence based mixed electoral system combining first-past-the-post and party-list proportional representation.

Apart from the compensatory/non-compensatory typology, a more detailed classification is possible based on how component systems relate to each other, according to academic literature. Below is a table of different categories of mixed electoral systems based on the five main types identified by Massicotte & Blais. ^[13] According to their terminology, methods of compensation are referred to as compensation is referred to as correction, while another type of dependent combination exists, called the conditional relation between sub-systems. Meanwhile, independent combinations mixed systems might have both local and national/regional tiers (called superposition), but some have only one at-large (national) tier, like the majority bonus system (fusion) or only a single tier for local/regional representation (called coexistence).

There are also supermixed systems, like rural-urban proportional (RUP), which is a hybrid mixed system that uses two tiers: the lower tier uses a proportional system, like list-PR or STV, in urban regions, and the upper tier uses MMP (itself a mixed system) either in rural regions alone or in all regions. ^[10]

Combination	Type	Attributes	System	Example(s) for use
Independent combination	Fusion	Two formulas are used within each district (or one district for the whole electorate)	Majority bonus (MBS)	France (local), French Polynesia[ citation needed ]
	Coexistence (hybrid)	Different districts use different systems in one tier	e.g. FPTP/SMP in single-member districts, list-PR in multi-member districts	Democratic Republic of the Congo, Panama
	Superposition	Different tiers use different systems	Parallel voting (e.g. FPTP/SMP locally, list-PR nationally)	Lithuania, Russia
			Single vote mixed-member majoritarian (e.g. FPTP/SMP locally, list-PR nationally)	Italy, Pakistan
Dependent combination	Correction (compensation)	One formula uses the results of other to compensate	Seat linkage mixed system with partial correction for overhang seats: New Zealand's mixed-member proportional representation (MMP)	New Zealand
			Seat linkage mixed system with no correction for overhang seats: UK Additional member system (AMS) - a less proportional version of MMP	Scotland
			Single vote with seat linkage (for mixed-member proportional representation)	Lesotho
			Single vote with compensatory vote transfer (semi-proportional)	Hungary (local)
	Conditional	Outcome of one formula determines the other formula	e.g. conditional party block voting: party that receives more than 50%, gets all seats otherwise all seats distributed proportionally	-
Combination of combinations	Supermixed	Superposition + correction	Scorporo / negative vote transfer (NVT), Parallel voting + PVT	Hungary
			Parallel voting + seat linkage	South Korea
		Superposition + fusion	National plurality bonus in regional list-PR	Greece
		Superposition + coexistence	e.g. some elected by PR in single national district, some are elected locally by plurality	Ecuador [13]
		Coexistence + conditional	e.g. FPTP/SMP in single-member districts, conditional party block voting in multi-member districts	Cameroon, Chad
		Coexistence + correction	Rural-urban proportional representation (RUP)	Denmark (formerly), Iceland (formerly)
		Conditional + correction + fusion	Majority jackpot systems, particularly two-round variants	Armenia, San Marino
		Fusion + correction	Dual-member proportional representation (DMP)	-

In a hybrid system, different electoral formulas are used in different contexts. These may be seen in coexistence, when different methods are used in different regions of a country, such as when FPTP is used in single-member districts and list-PR in multi-member districts, but every voter is a member of only one district (one tier). Some hybrid systems are generally not referred to as mixed systems, such as when as FPTP districts are the exception (e.g. overseas constituency) and list-PR is the rule, the overall system is usually considered proportional. Similarly, when FPTP is in single-member districts and used block voting (or party block voting) is used in multi-member districts, the system is referred to as a majoritarian one, as all components are majoritarian. Most mixed systems are not referred to as hybrid systems

Mixed-member majoritarian and mixed-member proportional

Main articles: Mixed-member majoritarian representation and Mixed-member proportional representation

Another distinction of mixed electoral systems is between mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) and mixed-member majoritarian representation (MMM).

Parallel voting

Main article: Parallel voting

Parallel voting is a mixed non-compensatory system with two tiers of representatives: a tier of single-member district representatives elected by a plurality/majoritarian method such as FPTP/SMP, and a tier of regional or at-large representatives elected by a separate proportional method such as party list PR. It is used for the first chamber (lower house) in many countries including Japan and Russia.

This type of parallel voting provides semi-proportional results, but is often referred to as mixed-member majoritarian representation, as the lack of compensation means each party can keep all the overhang seats it might win on the majoritarian side of the electoral system.

Seat linkage compensatory systems

Main articles: Seat linkage mixed system , Mixed-member proportional representation, and Additional member system

Like parallel voting, MMP and AMS also have a tier of district representatives typically elected by FPTP, and a tier of regional or at-large representatives elected by PR. Unlike parallel voting, MMP and AMS are mixed compensatory systems, meaning that the PR seats are allocated in a manner that corrects disproportionality caused by the district tier. MMP corrects disproportionalities by adding as many leveling seats as needed, this system is used by Germany and New Zealand.

A type of MMP used in the UK which does not always yield proportional results, but sometimes only "mixed semi-proportional representation" is called the additional member system. If the fixed number of compensatory seats are enough to compensate the results of the majoritarian FPTP/SMP side of the election, AMS is equivalent to MMP, but if not, AMS does not compensate for remaining overhang seats. The AMS models used in parts of the UK (Scotland and formerly Wales), with small regions with a fixed number of seats tend to produce only moderately proportional election outcomes.

In Lesotho, where a single vote versions seat linkage us used with a relatively large number of compensatory seats, results are usually proportional.

AV+ is a mixed compensatory system similar to the additional member system, with the notable difference that the district seats are awarded using the alternative vote. The system was proposed by the Jenkins Commission as a possible alternative to FPTP for elections to the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

Dual member mixed proportional (DMP) is a mixed compensatory system using the same principle as more common variants of MMP, except that the plurality and PR seats are paired and dedicated to dual-member (two seat) districts. Proposed as an alternative to FPTP for Canadian elections, DMP appeared as an option on a 2016 plebiscite in Prince Edward Island and a 2018 referendum in British Columbia.

Vote linkage compensatory systems

Main articles: Vote linkage mixed system, Mixed ballot transferable vote, and Scorporo

Vote linkage compensatory systems are an alternative to seat linkage compensation, currently only used in Hungary as part of a supermixed system. Such systems in use have been (inaccurately ^[14] ) described as mixed member proportional, but they were more commonly between MMP and MMM in nature, or closer to mixed-member majoritarian representation, offering little compensatory power.

MBTV is a mixed compensatory type of systems similar to MSV, except voters can vote separately for a local candidate and as a transfer vote on the compensatory tier. ^[15] It is different from MMP/AMS and AV+ in that there is a vote linkage (instead of seat linkage) between the tiers. The two parts of the dual ballot are tied in a way that only those lists votes get counted, which are on ballots that would be transfer votes in an equivalent positive vote transfer MSV system.

Scorporo is a two-tier mixed system similar to MMP in that voters have two votes (one for a local candidate on the lower tier, and one for a party list on the upper tier), except that disproportionality caused by the single-member district tier is partially addressed through a vote transfer mechanism. ^[16] Votes that are crucial to the election of district-winning candidates are excluded from the PR seat allocation, for this reason the method used by scorporo is referred to as a negative vote transfer system. ^[17] The system was used in Italy from 1993 to 2005

Majority bonus and majority jackpot systems

Main articles: Majority bonus system and Majority jackpot system

A simple bonus system (left) is also called a fusion type of mixed system. It mixes the FPTP and PR formulas in the same district and tier. A majority jackpot (right) is a supermixed system with a conditional and compensatory element as well.

Electoral systems with a majority bonus or jackpot have been referred to as "unconventional mixed systems", ^[18] which fall into the mixed-member majoritarian type, but they may be compensatory (jackpot) or non-compensatory (bonus). Employed by Armenia, Greece, and San Marino, as well as Italy from 2006 to 2013, ^[19] majority bonuses help the most popular party or alliance win a majority of the seats with a minority of the votes, similar in principle to plurality/majoritarian systems. However, PR is used to distribute the rest of seats (sometimes only among the opposition parties) and possibly within the governing alliance.

Number of votes

Double vote

Most mixed systems allow voters to cast separate votes for different formulas of the electoral system, including:

• Parallel voting
• Most "MMP" systems
• AV+ (the first vote is ranked)
• Scorporo

Mixed single vote (MSV)

Main article: Mixed single vote

MSV is a type of mixed systems using only a single vote that serves both as a vote for a local candidate and as a party list vote, split ticket voting is not possible. The system was used in Germany in a mixed proportional system, ^[12] and is currently used in Hungary as a semi-proportional system as well as Italy in a non-compensatory system. Other mixed systems using a single vote include majority bonus/jackpot systems and DMP.

Other systems that are usually considered mixed, which use a single vote are:

• Majority bonus and jackpot (a single party-list vote)
• DMP (a vote for a single candidate or a two-candidate ticket)

The RUP systems formerly used in Denmark and Iceland used a single vote, applicable both for the lower-tier constituencies - FPTP in the rural single-member constituencies, and list PR in the urban multi-member constituencies - and for the upper-tier national leveling seats (and in Denmark, also for the middle-tier regional leveling seats in rural areas). The implementation of RUP proposed in Canada foresees urban multi-member districts that use a single transferable vote, alongside single-member rural districts that are grouped in large multi-member regions; the rural districts and their corresponding regions.

Double simultaneous vote (DSV)

Main article: Double simultaneous vote

A simultaneous vote is a single vote that used in more than one elections held at once, which means it is not a typically regarded as a mixed system.^{[ citation needed ]}

List of countries using mixed systems

The table below lists the countries that use a mixed electoral system for the primary (lower) chamber of the legislature. Countries with coexistence-based hybrid systems have been excluded from the table, as have countries that mix two plurality/majoritarian systems. (See also the complete list of electoral systems by country.)

Country	Body	Latest election (year)	Type of mixed system	Seats per constituency	Mixed system	Component electoral systems	Total seats	Number of votes	Typical results	Notes
Andorra	General Council	2023	Non-compensatory	2 (local districts), 14 (nationwide constituency)	Parallel voting (superposition)	Party block voting (PBV) and party-list PR	28	2	semi-proportional	The parish lists and the national list are independent of one another: the same person cannot appear on both the national list and on a parish list, and voters cast two separate ballots (there is no requirement to vote for the same party for both lists). [20]
Argentina	Legislature of Córdoba Province	2019	Non-compensatory	1 (local districts), 44 (nationwide constituency)	Parallel voting (superposition)		70	2	semi-proportional
	Legislature of Río Negro Province		Non-compensatory						semi-proportional
	Legislature of San Juan Province		Non-compensatory						semi-proportional
	Legislature of Santa Cruz Province		Non-compensatory						semi-proportional
Armenia			Partially compensatory		Majority jackpot system	Party-list PR + party block voting (PBV)			semi-proportional
Bolivia	Chamber of Deputies	2020	Compensatory	1 (local districts), ? (regional constituencies), 7 (indigenous seats elected by the usos y costumbres )	Seat linkage MMP without levelling seats	First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) + Party-list PR	130	2 (list ballot is DSV)	proportional	List ballots are a double simultaneous vote together with the presidential election [21]
Djibouti	National Assembly	2018		3-28			65		semi-proportional	80% of seats (rounded to the nearest integer) in each constituency are awarded to the party receiving the most votes (party block voting), remaining seats are allocated proportionally to other parties receiving over 10% (closed list, D'Hondt method)
Georgia	Parliament	2020	Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)		150		semi-proportional
Germany	Bundestag (lower house of the federal parliament)	2021	Compensatory	1 (local districts), varies (regional constituencies),	Mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) - with levelling seats	Party-list PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	598 + leveling seats	2	proportional	Referred to as personalized proportional representation, [22] in 1949 as a result of inter-party bargaining. [23] Originally used single vote version, switched to two vote version before the 1953 election.
	State parliaments, except Bremen, Hamburg Saarland	varies by state	Compensatory	varies by state	Mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) - with levelling seats	Party-list PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	varies by state	varies by state	proportional	Bavaria uniquely uses an open-list system for its party-list seats. Baden-Württemberg uses MMP without lists.
Greece	Hellenic Parliament	2019	Non-compensatory		Majority bonus				semi-proportional
Guinea	National Assembly	2020	Non-compensatory	1 (local districts), 76 (national constituency)	parallel voting (superposition)	Party-list PR (Hare quota) + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	114		semi-proportional
Hungary	National Assembly (Országgyűlés)	2018	Partially compensatory	1 (local districts), 93 (national constituency)	Supermixed: parallel voting (superposition) and positive vote transfer (correction)	First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) + national list-PR	199	2	semi-proportional
Italy	Chamber of Deputies	2022	Non-compensatory	1 (147 single-member districts) 245 (national constituency, seats redistributed into 49 multi-member districts) 8 (Italians abroad constituency) [24]	Superposition	List PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	400	1 (mixed single vote)	semi-proportional	mixed single vote
	Senate	2022	Non-compensatory	1 (74 single-member districts) varies, cannot be less than 2 (20 regional constituencies, seats redistributed into 26 multi-member districts) 4 (Italians abroad constituency) [24]	Superposition	List PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	200	1 (mixed single vote)	semi-proportional	mixed single vote
Japan	House of Representatives	2021	Non-compensatory	1 (local districts)	Parallel voting (superposition)	First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) and List PR	465	2	semi-proportional
	House of Councillors		Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)	SNTV and List PR		2	semi-proportional
Republic of Korea (South Korea)	National Assembly	2024	Partially compensatory	1 (local districts), 46 additional seats (seat linkage)	Seat linkage system (compensation)	Party-list PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	300	2	(semi-)proportional	From 2019 to 2024: supermixed parallel voting (superposition) and additional member system (correction), with 253 single-member constituencies, 17 supplementary seats (a la parallel voting), and 30 compensatory seats (seat linkage) Since 2024 only seat linkage compensatory system, with very few compensatory seats: de facto mixed-member majoritarian representation
Kazakhstan	Majilis	2023	Non-compensatory	1 (local districts), 69 (nationwide constituency)	Parallel voting (superposition)	Party-list PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	98	2	semi-proportional
Kyrgyzstan	Supreme Council	2021	Non-compensatory	1 (local districts), 54 (nationwide constituency)	Parallel voting (superposition)	Party-list PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)		2	semi-proportional
Lesotho	National Assembly	2022	Compensatory	1 (local districts), 40 additional seats (seat linkage)	Seat linkage system (compensation)	Party-list PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	120	1 (mixed single vote)	proportional
Lithuania	Seimas		Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)	TRS and List PR	71		semi-proportional
Mauritania
Mexico	Chamber of Deputies	2021	Partially compensatory	1 (local districts), 40 (multi-member districts)	Supermixed parallel voting (superposition) and conditional correction	First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) + Party-list PR (Largest remainder:Hare quota)		2	semi-proportional	Since 1996, a party cannot get more seats overall than 8% above its result nationally (i.e., to win 50% of the legislative seats, a party must win at least 42% of the vote nationwide). There are three exceptions on this rule: first, a party can only lose PR-seats due to this rule (and no plurality-seats); second, a party can never get more than 300 seats overall (even if it has more than 52% of the vote nationally); and third, a party can exceed this 8% rule if it wins the seats in the single-member districts.
	Chamber of Senators	2018	Non-compensatory	3 (local districts), 32 (multi-member districts)	Superposition	Limited (party) block voting locally (2 seats from each constituency to largest party, 1 to the second largest party) + Party-list PR nationwide		1 (mixed single vote)	semi-proportional
Monaco
Mongolia
Morocco
Nepal
New Zealand	House of Representatives	2023	Compensatory	1 (local districts), 48 additional seats (seat linkage) + additional seats in case of overhang seats	Seat linkage: mixed member proportional (MMP)	Party-list PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP)	120	2	proportional	Following a long electoral reform process, beginning with the Royal Commission on the Electoral System in 1985 and ending with the 1993 referendum on the voting system. It was first used in an election in 1996. The system's use was reviewed by referendum in November 2011, with the majority (56.17%) voting to keep it. In 2020 general election, the Labour Party won 65 out of 120 seats, becoming the first party under MMP to receive a majority.
Pakistan	National Assembly		Non-compensatory		Superposition,seat linkage non compensatory	First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) for 272 seats + 70 members appointed by parties proportional with seats already won		1	majoritarian
Philippines	House of Representatives	2019	Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)				semi-proportional
Russian Federation	State Duma	2021	Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)				semi-proportional
San Marino	Grand and General Council	2019	Non-compensatory		Majority jackpot				proportional (first round)
Senegal	National Assembly	2017	Non-compensatory
Seychelles	National Assembly	2020	Non-compensatory
South Africa	Municipal elections including: Local municipalities Metropolitan municipalities	2021	Compensatory	1	MMP with ca. 50% FPTP and 50% seat linkage	Varies by municipality 7 - 270				Two ballots - one with FPTP candidates (Ward) and the other with just party names (PR). Compensatory seats are based on the sum of both ballots, effectively allocated using the D'Hondt method.
Sri Lanka
Taiwan(Republic of China)	Legislative Yuan	2024	Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)
Tajikistan	Assembly of Representatives	2020	Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)
Tanzania	National Assembly	2020	Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)
Thailand	House of Representatives	next election, last election (2019) was held under MMP	Non-compensatory		Parallel voting (superposition)			2
United Kingdom	Scotland - Scottish Parliament		Compensatory		Additional member system (AMS)			semi-proportional	2	MMP with each electoral region normally electing 9 local MSPs (with exceptions to 3 regions) and 7 regional MSPs
	Wales - Senedd (Welsh Parliament)		Compensatory		Additional member system (AMS)			semi-proportional	2	MMP with each electoral region normally electing 8 local MSs (with exceptions to 2 regions) and 4 regional MSs. Starting from 2026, the additional member system will effectively be replaced by closed-list proportional representation following the approval of Senedd Reform Bill.
	Local elections in London (Assembly)		Compensatory		Additional member system (AMS)			semi-proportional	2	MMP with 14 constituencies each electing 1 local AM and 11 Londonwide AMs.
Venezuela	National Assembly	2020	Non-compensatory	1 (local districts), 400 (nationwide constituency)	Parallel voting (superposition)			2
Zimbabwe	National Assembly	2018	Non-compensatory	1 (local districts), 10 (proportional constituencies)	Superposition			1

See also

• Electoral systems
• List of electoral systems by country
• Proportional representation
• Semi-proportional representation
• Representative democracy
• Types of democracy

References

1. "Electoral System Design: The New International IDEA Handbook". International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. 2005.
2. ACE Project Electoral Knowledge Network. "Mixed Systems" . Retrieved 20 October 2017.
3. Norris, Pippa (1997). "Choosing Electoral Systems: Proportional, Majoritarian and Mixed Systems" (PDF). Harvard University.
4. Massicotte, Louis (2004). In Search of Compensatory Mixed Electoral System for Québec (PDF) (Report).
5. Massicotte & Blais (1999). "Mixed electoral systems: a conceptual and empirical survey". Electoral Studies. 18 (3): 341–366. doi:10.1016/S0261-3794(98)00063-8.
6. "Electoral Systems and the Delimitation of Constituencies". International Foundation for Electoral Systems. 2 Jul 2009.
7. Bormann, Nils-Christian; Golder, Matt (2013). "Democratic Electoral Systems around the world, 1946–2011" (PDF). Electoral Studies . 32 (2): 360–369. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2013.01.005. S2CID   154632837.
8. Bochsler, Daniel (May 13, 2010). "Chapter 5, How Party Systems Develop in Mixed Electoral Systems". Territory and Electoral Rules in Post-Communist Democracies. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN   9780230281424.
9. Bochsler, Daniel (May 13, 2010). "Chapter 5, How Party Systems Develop in Mixed Electoral Systems". Territory and Electoral Rules in Post-Communist Democracies. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN   9780230281424.
10. Massicotte, Louis (2004). In Search of Compensatory Mixed Electoral System for Québec (PDF) (Report).
11. Bochsler, Daniel (2012). "A quasi-proportional electoral system 'only for honest men'? The hidden potential for manipulating mixed compensatory electoral systems" (PDF). International Political Science Review . 33 (4): 401–420. doi:10.1177/0192512111420770. S2CID   154545923.
12. Golosov, G. V. (2013). "The Case for Mixed Single Vote Electoral Systems". The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies.
13. Massicotte & Blais (1999). "Mixed electoral systems: a conceptual and empirical survey". Electoral Studies. 18 (3): 341–366. doi:10.1016/S0261-3794(98)00063-8.
14. Massicotte, Louis (April 2003). "To create or to copy? electoral systems in the German Länder". German Politics. 12 (1): 1–22. doi:10.1080/09644000412331307494. ISSN   0964-4008.
15. "Electoral incentives and the equal value of ballots in vote transfer systems with positive winner compensation".
16. Bochsler, Daniel; Golder, Matt (2014). "Which mixed-member proportional electoral formula fits you best? Assessing the proportionality principle of positive vote transfer systems" (PDF). Representation . 50 (1): 113–127. doi:10.1080/00344893.2014.902222. S2CID   153691414.
17. Ferrara, F (2003). "Electoral coordination and the strategic desertion of strong parties in compensatory mixed systems with negative vote transfers". Electoral Studies.
18. Bedock, Camille; Sauger, Nicolas (2014). "Electoral Systems with a Majority Bonus as Unconventional Mixed Systems". Representation . 50 (1): 99–12. doi:10.1080/00344893.2014.902220. S2CID   154685383.
19. Marco Bertacche (March 2, 2018). "How Italy's New Electoral System Works". Bloomberg Politics .
20. Arts. 19, 51 & 52, Law 28/2007.
21. Mayorga 1997 sfnm error: no target: CITEREFMayorga1997 (help); Mayorga 2001, p. 194 sfnm error: no target: CITEREFMayorga2001 (help).
22. "The Voting System". BMI. Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building & Community.
23. Krennerich, Michael. "Germany: The Original Mixed Member Proportional System". ACE Project. The Electoral Knowledge Network.
24. deputati, Camera dei (2022-02-25). "Sistema elettorale e geografia dei collegi - Costituzione, diritti e libertà". Documentazione parlamentare (in Italian). Retrieved 2023-03-28.

External links

• Chamber 1 Electoral Systems Map from the ACE Electoral Knowledge Network