Party-list proportional representation

Last updated October 25, 2024

Poster for the European Parliament election 2004 in Italy, showing party lists ElezioneBrunate.jpg — Poster for the European Parliament election 2004 in Italy, showing party lists

Party-list proportional representation (list-PR) is a system of proportional representation based on preregistered political parties, with each party being allocated a certain number of seats roughly proportional to their share of the vote.^[1]

In these systems, parties provide lists of candidates to be elected, or candidates may declare their affiliation with a political party (in some open-list systems). Seats are distributed by election authorities to each party, in proportion to the number of votes the party receives. Voters may cast votes for parties, as in Spain, Turkey, and Israel (closed lists); or for candidates whose vote totals are pooled together to parties, as in Finland, Brazil, and the Netherlands (mixed single vote or panachage).^[2]^[3]

Voting

In most party list systems, a voter will only support one party (a choose-one ballot). Open list systems may allow voters to support more than one candidate within a party list. Some open-list systems allow voters to support different candidates across multiple lists, which is called panachage.

Selection of party candidates

The order in which a party's list candidates get elected may be pre-determined by some method internal to the party or the candidates (a closed list system) or it may be determined by the voters at large (an open list system) or by districts (a local list system).

Closed list

In a closed list system, each political party has pre-decided who will receive the seats allocated to that party in the elections, so that the candidates positioned highest on this list will always get a seat in the parliament while the candidates positioned very low on the closed list will not. Voters vote only for the party, not for individual candidates.

Open list

An open list describes any variant of a party-list where voters have at least some influence on the order in which a party's candidates are elected. Open lists can be anywhere from relatively closed, where a candidate can move up a predetermined list only with a certain number of votes, to completely open, where the order of the list completely depends on the number of votes each individual candidate gets.^[4]

Apportionment of party seats

Many variations on seat allocation within party-list proportional representation exist. Different apportionment methods may favor smaller or larger parties:^[5]

D'Hondt method (biased towards large parties)^[6]
Sainte-Laguë method (roughly unbiased)
Huntington–Hill method (roughly unbiased)
Adams method (biased towards small parties)
LR-Hare (roughly unbiased)
LR-Droop (biased towards large parties)

The apportionment methods can be classified into two categories:

The highest averages method (or divisor method), including the D'Hondt method (Jefferson method) is used in Armenia, Austria, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Croatia, Estonia, Finland, Poland, and Spain; and the Sainte-Laguë method (Webster method) is used in Indonesia, New Zealand, Norway, and Sweden.
The largest remainder (LR) methods, including the Hamilton (Hare) method and Droop method.

While the allocation formula is important, equally important is the district magnitude (number of seats in a constituency). The higher the district magnitude, the more proportional an electoral system becomes, with the most proportional results being when there is no division into constituencies at all and the entire country is treated as a single constituency.^{[ citation needed ]} In some countries the electoral system works on two levels: at-large for parties, and in constituencies for candidates, with local party-lists seen as fractions of general, national lists. In this case, magnitude of local constituencies is irrelevant, seat apportionment being calculated at national level.

List proportional representation may also be combined with other apportionment methods in various mixed systems, using either additional member systems or parallel voting.

Example

Below it can be seen how different apportionment methods yield different results when apportioning 100 seats. Here, parties B and A are

Webster's method yields the same result (though this is not always the case). Otherwise, all other methods give a different number of seats to the parties.

Notice how the D'Hondt method breaks the quota rule (shown in red text) and favors the largest party by "rounding" an ideal apportionment of 35.91 up to 37.

Adams' method greatly favor smaller parties, giving 2 seats to the smallest party, and would give at least 1 seat to every party receiving at least one vote.


Party	Votes	Entitlement	Largest remainders		Highest averages
			Hare	Droop quota	D'Hondt (Jefferson)	Sainte-Laguë (Webster)	Huntington-Hill	Adams
			${\frac {\text{votes}}{\text{seats}}}$	${\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+1}}$	${\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+1}}$	${\frac {\text{votes}}{{\text{seats}}+0.5}}$	${\frac {\text{votes}}{\sqrt {{\text{seats}}({\text{seats}}+1)}}}$	${\frac {\text{votes}}{\text{seats}}}$
A	1017	35.91	36	36	37	36	36	35
B	1000	35.31	35	36	36	35	35	34
C	383	13.52	14	13	13	14	13	14
D	327	11.55	12	12	11	12	12	12
E	63	2.22	2	2	2	2	2	3
F	42	1.48	1	1	1	1	2	2
Total	2832	100 seats	100	100	100	100	100	100

Electoral threshold

List of countries using party-list proportional representation

The table below lists countries that use a proportional electoral system to fill a nationally elected legislative body. Detailed information on electoral systems applying to the first chamber of the legislature is maintained by the ACE Electoral Knowledge Network.^[7]^[8] Countries using PR as part of a parallel voting (mixed-member majoritarian) or other mixed system (e.g. MMP) are not included.

Country	Legislative body	List type	Variation of open lists (if applicable)	Apportionment method	Electoral threshold	Constituencies	Governmental system	Notes
Albania	Parliament (Kuvendi)	Open list		d'Hondt method	4% nationally or 2.5% in a district	Counties	Parliamentary republic
Algeria	People's National Assembly	Open list		Hare quota	5% of votes in respective district.^[9]		Semi-presidential republic
Angola	National Assembly	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	^{[ citation needed ]}	5 member districts and nationwide	Parliamentary republic with an executive presidency	Double simultaneous vote use to elect the President and the National Assembly at the same election.
Argentina	Chamber of Deputies	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	3% of registered voters	Provinces	Presidential republic
Armenia	National Assembly	Open list		D'Hondt method	5% (parties), 7% (blocs)		Parliamentary republic	Party lists run-off, but only if necessary to ensure stable majority of 54% if it is not achieved either immediately (one party) or through building a coalition.^[10]^[11] If a party would win more than 2/3 seats, at least 1/3 seats are distributed to the other parties.
Armenia	National Assembly	Closed list	—	D'Hondt method	5% (parties), 7% (blocs)		Parliamentary republic
Aruba	Parliament	Open list		D'Hondt method
Austria	National Council	Open list	More open: 14% on the district level (among votes for the candidates party)	Hare quota	4%	Single-member districts within federal states (Länder)	Semi-presidential republic
		Open list	More open: 10% on the regional (state) level (among votes for the candidates party)	Hare quota		Federal states (Länder)
		Open list	More open: 7% of the on the federal level (among votes for the candidates party)	d'Hondt method		Single federal (nationwide) constituency
Belgium	Chamber of Representative	Open list		D'Hondt method	5%	Constituencies	Constitutional monarchy
Bénin	National Assembly	Closed list	—	Largest remainder method	10%	Constituencies	Presidential republic
Bolivia	Chamber of Senators	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method		Departments	Presidential republic	Ballots use the double simultaneous vote: voters cast a single vote for a presidential candidate and their party's list and local candidates at the same time (vote splitting is not possible/allowed)
Bosnia and Herzegovina	House of Representative	Open list		Sainte-Laguë method			Parliamentary directorial republic
Brazil	Chamber of Deputies	Open list		D'Hondt method	2% distributed in at least 9 Federation Units with at least 1% of the valid votes in each one of them	States and Federal District	Presidential republic
Bulgaria	National Assembly	Open list		Hare quota	4%	Constituencies	Parliamentary republic
Cape Verde		Closed list	—
Chile		Open list
Colombia	Chamber of Representatives	Closed list	—				Unitary presidential republic
Colombia	Senate	Closed list	—				Unitary presidential republic
Costa Rica		Closed list	—
Croatia		Open list			5%
Cyprus		Open list
Czech Republic		Open list			5%
Denmark		Open list			2%
Dominican Republic		Closed list	—
East Timor		Open list
Ecuador	National Congress	Closed list	—	Sainte-Laguë method
El Salvador	Legislative Assembly	Open list		D'Hondt method
Estonia		Open list			5%
Faroe Islands
Fiji		Open list			5%
Finland		Open list
Greenland		Open list
Guatemala		Closed list	—
Guyana		Closed list	—
Honduras		Open list
Iceland		Open list
Indonesia	House of Representative	Open list		Sainte-Laguë method	4%	3 to 10 members constituencies	Presidential system
Israel		Closed list	—		3.25%
Kosovo		Open list		Sainte-Laguë method
Latvia		Open list		Sainte-Laguë method	5%
Lebanon
Liechtenstein		Open list			8%
Luxembourg	Chamber of Deputies	Open list	Panachage (number of votes equal to the number of members elected)	d'Hondt method	No de jure threshold	Four multi-member constituencies, ranging from 7 to 23 members	Parliamentary system
Macedonia		Closed list
Moldova	Parliament	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	5% (party), 7% (electoral block), 2% (independent)^[12]	None (single nationwide constituency)	Unitary parliamentary republic
Montenegro		Closed list	—		3%
Namibia		Closed list	—
Netherlands	House of Representatives	Open list	More open (25% of the quota to override the default party-list)	d'Hondt method	No de jure threshold, but an effective threshold of 0.67% (1/150) for a seat	None (single nationwide constituency)	Parliamentary system
Norway	Parliament (Storting)	Open list	De facto Closed list (50% of votes to override)	Sainte-Laguë method	4%
Paraguay		Closed list
Peru		Closed list	—		5%
Poland	Sejm	Open list		d'Hondt method	5% threshold or more for single parties, 8% or more for coalitions or 0% or more for minorities	41 multi-member constituencies, ranging from 7 to 20 members	Parliamentary republic
Portugal	Assembly of the Republic	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	No threshold		Semi-presidential republic
Romania		Closed list	—
San Marino		Open list			3.5%			If needed to ensure a stable majority, the two best-placed parties participate in a run-off vote to receive a majority bonus.
São Tomé and Príncipe		Closed list	—
Serbia		Closed list	—		3%
Sierra Leone
Sint Maarten		Open list
Slovakia		Open list			5%
Slovenia		Open list		Largest remainder (Droop quota)	4%
Slovenia		Open list		d'Hondt method	4%
South Africa		Closed list	—
Spain	Congress of Deputies	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	3%	Provinces of Spain	Parliamentary system
Sri Lanka	Parliament	Open list (for 196/225 seats)	Panachage (up to 3 preference votes)^[13]	d'Hondt method	5% (per constituency)	Constituencies	Semi-presidential system
Sri Lanka	Parliament	Closed list (for 29/225 seats)	—	?	No threshold	None (single nationwide constituency)	Semi-presidential system
Suriname	National Assembly	Open list	Most open	d'Hondt method	No threshold	Districts of Suriname	Assembly-independent republic
Sweden	Riksdag	Open list	More open (5% of the party vote to override the default party-list)^[14]	Sainte-Laguë method (leveling seats)	4% nationally or 12% in a given constituency	Counties of Sweden (some counties are further subdivided)	Parliamentary system
Switzerland	National Council	Open list	Panachage	Hagenbach-Bischoff system	No threshold	Cantons of Switzerland	Semi-direct democracy under an assembly-independent ^[15]^[16] directorial republic
Tunisia	Assembly of the Representatives of the People	Closed list	—	Largest remainder method	No threshold	Constituencies	Semi-presidential system
Turkey	Grand National Assembly	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	7%. No threshold for independent candidates.	Provinces of Turkey (some provinces are further subdivided)	Presidential system
Uruguay	Chamber of Representatives	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	No threshold	Departments of Uruguay	Presidential system	Ballots use the double simultaneous vote, the same ballot is used for electing the president (first round) and the two chambers
Uruguay	Chamber of Senators	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	No threshold	None (single nationwide constituency)	Presidential system
Wales	Senedd	Closed list	—	d'Hondt method	No threshold

Authoritarian regimes

Country	Legislative body	List type	Apportionment method	Electoral threshold	Constituencies	Governmental system
Burkina Faso	National Assembly	Closed list			Constituencies	Semi-presidential republic
Burundi	National Assembly	Closed list	D'Hondt method	2%	Constituencies	Presidential republic
Cambodia	National Assembly	Closed list	D'Hondt method		Constituencies	Constitutional monarchy
Equatorial Guinea	Chamber of Deputies	Closed list		10%	Constituencies	Presidential republic
Equatorial Guinea	Senate	Closed list			Constituencies	Presidential republic
Guinea-Bissau	National People's Assembly	Closed list				Semi-presidential republic
Mozambique		Closed list
Rwanda		Closed list
Togo	National Assembly	Closed list	Highest averages method	No threshold	Constituencies	Presidential system

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proportional representation</span> Voting system that makes outcomes proportional to vote totals

Proportional representation (PR) refers to any type of electoral system under which subgroups of an electorate are reflected proportionately in the elected body. The concept applies mainly to political divisions among voters. The essence of such systems is that all votes cast – or almost all votes cast – contribute to the result and are effectively used to help elect someone. Under other election systems, a bare plurality or a scant majority are all that are used to elect candidates. PR systems provide balanced representation to different factions, reflecting how votes are cast.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Single non-transferable vote</span> Multi-winner, semi-proportional electoral system

Single non-transferable vote or SNTV is an electoral system used to elect multiple winners. It is a semi-proportional variant of first-past-the-post voting, applied to multi-member districts where each voter casts just one vote. SNTV generally makes it unlikely that a single party will take all seats in a city, as generally happens with winner-take-all systems. SNTV can be considered a variant of dot voting where each voter has only one point to assign.

The additional-member system (AMS) is a two-vote seat-linkage-based mixed electoral system used in the United Kingdom in which most representatives are elected in single-member districts (SMDs), and a fixed number of other "additional members" are elected from a closed list to make the seat distribution in the chamber more proportional to the votes cast for party lists. It is distinct from using parallel voting for the list seats in that the "additional member" seats are awarded to parties taking into account seats won in SMDs – these are ignored under parallel voting.

Mixed-member proportional representation is a type of representation provided by some mixed electoral systems which combine local winner-take-all elections with a compensatory tier with party lists, in a way that produces proportional representation overall. Like proportional representation, MMP is not a single system, but a principle and goal of several similar systems. Some systems designed to achieve proportionality are still called mixed-member proportional, even if they generally fall short of full proportionality. In this case, they provide semi-proportional representation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">D'Hondt method</span> Method for allocating seats in parliaments

The D'Hondt method, also called the Jefferson method or the greatest divisors method, is an apportionment method for allocating seats in parliaments among federal states, or in proportional representation among political parties. It belongs to the class of highest-averages methods. Compared to ideal proportional representation, the D'Hondt method reduces somewhat the political fragmentation for smaller electoral district sizes, where it favors larger political parties over small parties.

An electoraldistrict, sometimes called a constituency, riding, or ward, is a subdivision of a larger state created to provide its population with representation in the larger state's legislature. That body, or the state's constitution or a body established for that purpose, determines each district's boundaries and whether each will be represented by a single member or multiple members. Generally, only voters (constituents) who reside within the district are permitted to vote in an election held there. District representatives may be elected by a first-past-the-post system, a proportional representative system, or another voting method. They may be selected by a direct election under universal suffrage, an indirect election, or another form of suffrage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hare quota</span> Electoral system quota formula

In the study of apportionment, the Harequota is the number of voters represented by each legislator under an idealized system of proportional representation, where every legislator represents an equal number of voters and where every vote is used to elect someone. The Hare quota is the total number of votes divided by the number of seats to be filled. The Hare quota was used in the original proposal for a single transferable vote system, and is still occasionally used, although it has since been largely supplanted by the Droop quota.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1995 Venetian regional election</span>

The Venetian regional election of 1995 took place on 23 April 1995.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral quota</span> Number of votes a candidate needs to win

In proportional representation systems, an electoral quota is the number of votes a candidate needs to be guaranteed election. They are used in some systems where a formula other than plurality is used to allocate seats.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2005 Lombard regional election</span>

The 2005 Lombard regional election took place on 3–4 April 2005. The 8th term of the Regional Council was chosen. Roberto Formigoni was re-elected for the third time in a row President, defeating Riccardo Sarfatti.

The 2005 Piedmontese regional election took place on 3–4 April 2005. Mercedes Bresso of the Democrats of the Left defeated the incumbent Enzo Ghigo of Forza Italia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2005 Emilia-Romagna regional election</span>

The Emilia-Romagna regional election of 2005 took place on 3–4 April 2005.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2000 Piedmontese regional election</span> Italian local election

The 2000 Piedmontese regional election took place on 16 April 2000. Enzo Ghigo of Forza Italia (FI) was re-elected for the second time in a row as the president of Piedmont, defeating Livia Turco of the Democrats of the Left (DS). His re-election resulted in a landslide, as this time he was also supported also by Lega Nord.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2000 Emilia-Romagna regional election</span>

The Emilia-Romagna regional election of 2000 took place on 16 April 2000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2000 Ligurian regional election</span>

The Ligurian regional election of 2000 took place on 16 April 2000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1995 Ligurian regional election</span>

The Ligurian regional election of 1995 took place on 23 April 1995.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2010 Ligurian regional election</span>

The Ligurian regional election of 2010 took place on 28–29 March 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Semi-proportional representation</span> Family of electoral systems

Semi-proportional representation characterizes multi-winner electoral systems which allow representation of minorities, but are not intended to reflect the strength of the competing political forces in close proportion to the votes they receive. Semi-proportional voting systems are generally used as a compromise between complex and expensive but more-proportional systems and simple winner-take-all systems. Examples of semi-proportional systems include the single non-transferable vote, limited voting, and parallel voting.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral system</span> Method by which voters make a choice between options

An electoral or voting system is a set of rules used to determine the results of an election. Electoral systems are used in politics to elect governments, while non-political elections may take place in business, non-profit organisations and informal organisations. These rules govern all aspects of the voting process: when elections occur, who is allowed to vote, who can stand as a candidate, how ballots are marked and cast, how the ballots are counted, how votes translate into the election outcome, limits on campaign spending, and other factors that can affect the result. Political electoral systems are defined by constitutions and electoral laws, are typically conducted by election commissions, and can use multiple types of elections for different offices.

A mixed electoral system is one that uses different electoral systems to elect different seats in a legislature. Most often, this involves a winner-take-all component combined with a proportional component. The results of the combination may be mixed-member proportional (MMP), where the overall results of the elections are proportional, 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.

References

↑ "Proportional Representation Systems". mtholyoke.edu.
↑ "Proportional Representation Open List Electoral Systems in Europe" (PDF). International Foundation for Electoral Systems. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-12-24.
↑ "Système électoral du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg(fr)". elections.public.lu.
↑ Smrek, Michal. "Mavericks or Loyalists? Popular Ballot Jumpers and Party Discipline in the Flexible-List PR Context". Political Research Quarterly . 76 (1): 323–336. doi:10.1177/10659129221087961.
↑ Benoit, Kenneth. "Which Electoral Formula Is the Most Proportional? A New Look with New Evidence" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-24.
↑ Wilson, Helen J. "The D'Hondt Method Explained" (PDF).
↑ ACE Project: The Electoral Knowledge Network. "Electoral Systems Comparative Data, World Map" . Retrieved 24 October 2017.
↑ ACE Project: The Electoral Knowledge Network. "Electoral Systems Comparative Data, Table by Country" . Retrieved 24 October 2017.
↑ "Final Report on Algeria's Legislative Elections" (pdf). ACE Project. National Democratic Institute. 10 May 2012. Retrieved 10 January 2015.
↑ "Armenia, Parliamentary Elections, 2 April 2017: Needs Assessment Mission Report". osce.org . Retrieved 2022-05-30.
↑ "DocumentView". www.arlis.am.
↑ CODUL ELECTORAL [Electoral Code] (94) (in Romanian). Parliament Republic of Moldova. 21 November 1997.
↑ "Sri Lanka electors can vote for one party, three preferences in 2020 general elections: polls chief". EconomyNext. August 4, 2020.
↑ Swedish Election Authority: Elections in Sweden: The way its done Archived 2009-02-25 at the Wayback Machine (page 16)
↑ Shugart, Matthew Søberg (December 2005). "Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive And Mixed Authority Patterns". French Politics. 3 (3): 323–351. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200087 . S2CID 73642272.
↑ Elgie, Robert (2016). "Government Systems, Party Politics, and Institutional Engineering in the Round". Insight Turkey. 18 (4): 79–92. ISSN 1302-177X. JSTOR 26300453.

External links

Advantages and disadvantages of List PR - from the ACE Project
Open, Closed and Free Lists - from the ACE Project
Handbook of Electoral System Choice Archived 2010-04-28 at the Wayback Machine
Apportionment, or How to Round Seat Numbers
Glossary of Electoral Formulas

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[1] "Proportional Representation Systems". mtholyoke.edu.

[2] "Proportional Representation Open List Electoral Systems in Europe" (PDF). International Foundation for Electoral Systems. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-12-24.

[3] "Système électoral du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg(fr)". elections.public.lu.

[4] Smrek, Michal. "Mavericks or Loyalists? Popular Ballot Jumpers and Party Discipline in the Flexible-List PR Context". Political Research Quarterly . 76 (1): 323–336. doi:10.1177/10659129221087961.

[5] Benoit, Kenneth. "Which Electoral Formula Is the Most Proportional? A New Look with New Evidence" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-24.

[6] Wilson, Helen J. "The D'Hondt Method Explained" (PDF).

[7] ACE Project: The Electoral Knowledge Network. "Electoral Systems Comparative Data, World Map" . Retrieved 24 October 2017.

[8] ACE Project: The Electoral Knowledge Network. "Electoral Systems Comparative Data, Table by Country" . Retrieved 24 October 2017.

[algeriaACE-9] "Final Report on Algeria's Legislative Elections" (pdf). ACE Project. National Democratic Institute. 10 May 2012. Retrieved 10 January 2015.

[10] "Armenia, Parliamentary Elections, 2 April 2017: Needs Assessment Mission Report". osce.org . Retrieved 2022-05-30.

[11] "DocumentView". www.arlis.am.

[12] CODUL ELECTORAL [Electoral Code] (94) (in Romanian). Parliament Republic of Moldova. 21 November 1997.

[13] "Sri Lanka electors can vote for one party, three preferences in 2020 general elections: polls chief". EconomyNext. August 4, 2020.

[14] Swedish Election Authority: Elections in Sweden: The way its done Archived 2009-02-25 at the Wayback Machine (page 16)

[15] Shugart, Matthew Søberg (December 2005). "Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive And Mixed Authority Patterns". French Politics. 3 (3): 323–351. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200087 . S2CID 73642272.

[16] Elgie, Robert (2016). "Government Systems, Party Politics, and Institutional Engineering in the Round". Insight Turkey. 18 (4): 79–92. ISSN 1302-177X. JSTOR 26300453.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]