It has been suggested that this article should be split into a new article titled Winner-take-most representation . (discuss) (August 2024) |
Part of the Politics and Economics series |
Electoral systems |
---|
Politicsportal Economicsportal |
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. [1] Semi-proportional voting systems are generally used as a compromise between complex and expensive but more-proportional systems (like the single transferable vote) and simple winner-take-all systems. [2] [3] Examples of semi-proportional systems include the single non-transferable vote, limited voting, and parallel voting.
Most proportional representation systems will not yield precisely proportional outcomes due to the use of election thresholds, small electoral regions, or other implementation details that vary from one elected body to another. However, systems that yield results close to the ideal are generally considered fully-proportional.
The choice to use a semi-proportional electoral system may be a deliberate attempt to find a balance between single-party rule and proportional representation. Semi-proportional systems can allow for fairer representation of those parties that have difficulty gaining even a single seat while retaining the possibility of one party gaining an overall majority of seats even if it receives less than a majority of the votes; they can ensure that the two or three largest parties all have their due share of seats or more while not producing representation for the smallest parties.
Because there are many measures of proportionality, [4] [5] and because there is no objective threshold, opinions may differ on what constitutes a semi-proportional system as opposed to a non-proportional one or a fully proportional system.
Election systems in which a party can achieve its due share of seats (proportionality) only by coordinating its voters are usually considered to be semi-proportional. [6] They are not non-proportional or majoritarian, since in the perfect case the outcome will be proportional, but they are not proportional either, since the perfect case is not guaranteed without coordination. Such systems include the single non-transferable vote and cumulative voting, both of which are commonly used to achieve approximately-proportional outcomes while maintaining simplicity and reducing the cost of election administration. Under these systems, parties often coordinate voters by limiting the size of the party slate, or by using complex vote management schemes where voters are asked to randomize which candidate(s) they support.
These systems are notable for the absence of an ordered electoral list. Candidates may coordinate their campaigns, and present or be presented as agents of a party, but voters may choose to support one candidate among the said group but not the others (that is, panachage is permitted).
Many writers consider the single transferable vote to be a semi-proportional system because of its substantial favoritism towards major parties, generally caused by a combination of the Droop quota in small districts, as well as the substantial degree of vote management involved when there are exhausted ballots. [7] On the other hand, some authors describe it as a proportional system, on the grounds that it is theoretically weakly proportional in the limit of infinitely-large constituencies. [8] However, it is worth noting that STV is only proportional for solid coalitions, i.e. if voters rank candidates first by party and only then by candidate. As such, the proportionality of STV breaks down if voters are split across party lines or choose to support candidates of different parties.
A major complication with proportionality under STV is the need for constituencies; small constituencies are strongly disproportional, but large constituencies make it difficult or impossible for voters to rank large numbers of candidates, turning the election into a de facto open list PR system, particularly where voters lack any meaningful information about the candidates on their ballot.
The degree of proportionality of the results in a district (and when combined with other district results, the proportionality of results across a country) depends on the number of seats elected in the district. In the 2011 Irish general election, Fine Gael received 45.2% of the seats with just 36.1% of the first preference votes. In the 2020 Irish general election, the Labour Party received 50% more votes than the Social Democrats, but both parties won the same number of seats. Ireland uses districts of 3-7 members.
Similarly, the 1998 Northern Ireland elections resulted in the Ulster Unionists winning more seats than the Social Democratic and Labour Party with a smaller share of the vote.
The proportionality of STV can be controversial, especially in close elections like the 1981 election in Malta. In this election, the Maltese Labour party won a majority of seats despite the Nationalist Party winning a majority of first preference votes. This caused a constitutional crisis, leading to a provision to provide bonus seats in case of disproportional results. These bonus seats were needed in 1987, 1996, and 2008 to prevent further electoral inversions.
The degree of proportionality nationwide is strongly related to the number of seats to be filled in each constituency. In a three-seat constituency using the Droop quota, a full quarter of the vote is wasted. In a nine-seat constituency, only a tenth of the vote is wasted, and a party needs only 10% of the vote to win a seat. Consequently, the best proportionality is achieved when there are a large number of representatives per constituency. The Hare quota is theoretically unbiased, allowing some of the errors in apportionment to cancel out if voters across the whole country. However, it also increases the vulnerability of STV to vote management by large parties, allowing them to win the same number of seats they would have won under Droop.
Other forms of semi-proportional representation are based on, or at least use, party lists to work. Looking to the electoral systems effectively in use around the world, there are three general methods to reinforce the majoritarian principle of representation (but not necessarily majoritarianism or majority rule, see electoral inversion and plurality) starting from basic PR mechanisms: parallel voting, the majority bonus system (MBS), and extremely reduced constituency magnitude.
In additional member systems (AMS), the number of additional members may not be sufficient to balance the disproportionality of the original system, thereby producing less than proportional results. When this imbalance is created intentionally, the result could be described as a semi-proportional system — for example, in the National Assembly for Wales, where only 33.3% of members are compensatory. The electoral system commonly referred to in Britain as the "additional member system" is also used for the Scottish Parliament and the London Assembly, with generally proportional results. Similarly, in vote transfer based mixed single vote systems, the number of compensatory seats may be too low (or too high) to achieve proportionality. [9] Such a system is used in Hungary in local elections. [10] The "scorporo" system used for the Parliament of Italy from 1993 to 2005 and the electoral system for the National Assembly of Hungary since 1990 are also special cases, based on parallel voting, but also including compensatory mechanisms – which however are insufficient for providing proportional results.
A majority bonus system takes an otherwise proportional system based on multi-member constituencies, and introduces disproportionality by granting additional seats to the first party or alliance. Majority bonuses help produce landslide victories similar to those which occur in elections under plurality systems. The majority bonus system was first introduced by Benito Mussolini to win the election of 1924. It has remained in use in Italy, as well as seeing some use in San Marino, Greece, and France.[ citation needed ]
The simplest mechanism to reinforce major parties in PR system is to severely restrict the number of seats per electoral district, which increases the Droop quota (the number of votes needed to be guaranteed a seat).
The last main group usually considered semi-proportional consists of parallel voting models. The system used for the Chamber of Deputies of Mexico since 1996 is considered a parallel voting system, modified by a list-seat ceiling (8%) for over-representation of parties.
Country | Legislative body | Latest election (year) | Type of majoritarian system | (Seats per constituency) | Electoral system | Total seats | Governmental system | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Andorra | General Council | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 2 (local districts) / 14 (nationwide constituency) | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): Party block voting (PBV) locally + list PR nationwide | 28 | Parliamentary system | |
Democratic Republic of the Congo | National Assembly | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1–17 | Coexistence mixed majoritarian (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in single-member districts and List PR in multi-member districts (Largest remainder) | 500 | ||
Djibouti | National Assembly | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 3–28 | Fusion / majority jackpot (MBS): 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) | 65 | Presidential system | |
France | French Polynesia Assembly | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 4–17 | Two-round majority bonus system (MBS) in multi-member constituencies | 57 | ||
Georgia | Parliament | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 120 (national constituency) | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): Party-list PR (closed list) + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) | 150 | Parliamentary system | |
Greece | Mixed-member majoritarian | Majority bonus system (MBS) | ||||||
Guinea | National Assembly | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 76 (national constituency) | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): Party-list PR (Hare quota) + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) | 114 | ||
Hungary | National Assembly (Országgyűlés) | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 93 (national constituency) | Supermixed / Mixed-member majoritarian (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) + national list-PR for 93 seats (combination of parallel voting and positive vote transfer) | 199 | Parliamentary system | Before the 2014, a different mixed system was used with a two-round system in single-member districts |
Iraq | Single non-transferable vote (SNTV) | |||||||
Italy | Chamber of Deputies | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 12 (Italians abroad constituency), ?-? (multi-member districts)[ citation needed ] | Superposition / Mixed-member majoritarian (MMM) using a single vote List PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) | 630 | Parliamentary system | |
Senate | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 6 (Italians abroad constituency), ?-? (multi-member districts)[ citation needed ] | Superposition / Mixed-member majoritarian (MMM) using a single vote List PR + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) | 315 | Parliamentary system | ||
Republic of Korea (South Korea) | National Assembly | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 17 supplementary seats (parallel voting), 30 additional seats (AMS), | Supermixed / Mixed-member majoritarian (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) and List PR (hybrid of parallel voting and AMS) | 300 | Presidential system | |
Kuwait | Single non-transferable vote (SNTV) | |||||||
Kyrgyzstan | Supreme Council | 2021 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 54 (nationwide constituency) | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): Party-list PR (open list) + First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) | 90 | Presidential system | |
Lithuania | Seimas | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 70 (nationwide constituency) | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): Two-round system (TRS) for 71 seats + List PR (Largest remainder) for 70 seats | 141 | Semi-presidential system | |
Madagascar | National Assembly | 2019 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1–2 | Coexistence: First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in 87 single-member districts, party-list PR (Closed list, highest averages method) in 32 two-member districts (64 seats in binomial system) | 151 | Semi-presidential system | |
Mauritania | National Assembly | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1–3 (local districts), 40 (nationwide constituency) | Coexistence+superposition (parallel) supermixed/hybrid: Two-round system (TRS) in single-member districts, two-round block voting (BV) in dual-member districts, and List PR (simple quota largest remainder; closed-list) in larger districts + twice 20 nationally List PR (one set of 20 reserved for women) | 157 | Semi-presidential system | |
Monaco | National Council | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 24 (nationwide constituency) | Superposition / Mixed-member majoritarian (MMM) using a single (panachage) ballot: Plurality block voting (BV) in single nationwide constituency for 16 seats; D'Hondt method (8 seats) | 24 | Parliamentary system [ citation needed ] | |
Palestine | Legislative Council | 2006 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1–9 (local districts), 66 (nationwide constituency) | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in single-member districts and Plurality block voting (BV) in two-seat districts for 66 seats in total (some reserved for Christians) + List PR for 66 seats | 132 | Semi-presidential system | In the 1996 elections, 88 PLC members were chosen from several multi-member constituencies via block voting |
Panama | National Assembly | 2019 | Mixed-member majoritarian | Coexistence mixed majoritarian (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in single-member districts, Saripolo or Sartori method (Largest remainder, but remainders only for those with no seats) in multi-member districts | 71 | Presidential system | ||
Philippines | House of Representatives | 2019 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 61 (nationwide constituency) | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in single-member districts (243 in 2019) + List PR (closed lists; modified Hare quota with 3-seat cap and no remainders) (61 in 2019) | 304 | Presidential system | |
Russian Federation | State Duma | 2021 | Mixed-member majoritarian | [ citation needed ] | Parallel voting / superposition (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) and List PR | 450 | Semi-presidential system | |
San Marino | Majority bonus system (MBS) | Parliamentary system | ||||||
Scotland | Parliament | 2021 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 73 (constituency), 56 (7 list MSPs elected in each of the 8 regions) | Additional Member System (AMS) | 129 | Parliamentary system | |
Senegal | 2017 | Mixed-member majoritarian | Parallel | 165 | Presidential system | |||
Seychelles | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | Parallel | 35 | Presidential system | |||
Singapore | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) and party block voting (PBV) | 104 (93 directly elected) | ||||
Sudan | 2015 | Mixed-member majoritarian | Parallel | 450 | ||||
Switzerland | Council of States Only in:
| 2 | Single non-transferable vote (SNTV) | 46 | ||||
Taiwan | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | Parallel | 113 | ||||
Tajikistan | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | Parallel | 63 | ||||
Thailand | 2019 (using MMP) | Mixed-member majoritarian | Parallel | 500 | The next election is scheduled to be held under parallel voting again, after one election (2019) held using a single vote MMP system | |||
British Overseas Territories (United Kingdom) | Gibraltar | Limited voting (LV) | ||||||
Pitcairn Islands | Single non-transferable vote (SNTV) | |||||||
Vanuatu | Single non-transferable vote (SNTV) | |||||||
Venezuela | National Assembly | 2020 | Mixed-member majoritarian | Parallel voting (MMM): First-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) and list PR | 280 (277 directly elected) | Presidential system | ||
Zimbabwe | National Assembly | 2018 | Mixed-member majoritarian | 1 (local districts), 10 (proportional constituencies) | Mixed-member majoritarian (MMM): 210 seats by first-past-the-post (FPTP/SMP) in local districts 60 seats reserved for women by list PR | 270 | Presidential system | Voters cast a single vote |
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. Further, a PR system is one that produces mixed and balanced representation, reflecting how votes are cast.
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.
The single transferable vote (STV), a type of proportional ranked choice voting, is a multi-winner electoral system in which each voter casts a single vote in the form of a ranked-choice ballot. Voters have the option to rank candidates, and their vote may be transferred according to alternative preferences if their preferred candidate is eliminated or elected with surplus votes, so that their vote is used to elect someone they prefer over others in the running. STV aims to approach proportional representation based on votes cast in the district where it is used, so that each vote is worth about the same as another.
The additional member system (AMS) or is a two vote seat-linkage-based mixed electoral system used in the United Kingdom where 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.
In the study of electoral systems, the Droop quota is the minimum number of supporters a party or candidate needs to receive in a district to guarantee they will win at least one seat in a legislature.
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.
In political science, parallelvoting or superposition refers to the use of two or more electoral systems to elect different members of a legislature. More precisely, an electoral system is a superposition if it is a mixture of at least two tiers, which do not interact with each other in any way; one part of a legislature is elected using one method, while another part is elected using a different method, with all voters participating in both. Thus, the final results can be found by calculating the results for each system separately based on the votes alone, then adding them together. A system is called fusion or majority bonus, another independent mixture of two system but without two tiers. Superposition is also not the same as "coexistence", which when different districts in the same election use different systems. Superposition, fusion and coexistence are distinct from dependent mixed electoral systems like compensatory (corrective) and conditional systems.
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.
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. 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.
The majority bonus system (MBS), sometimes referred to as the reinforced proportionality electoral system is a semi-proportional method of election multiple representatives. The majority bonus is typically classified a mixed electoral system, as it integrates both the proportionality and winner-take-all principles to provide mixed-member majoritarian representation. An academic term for such a hybrid system is fusion, which means an independent combination of two systems in which the two formulas are mixed within the same district (the district in question may be a single, nationwide constituency). This makes it distinct from other mixed systems such as parallel voting (superposition) and coexistence. A majority bonus may also be one of the properties of a supermixed system.
There are a number of complications and issues surrounding the application and use of single transferable vote proportional representation that form the basis of discussions between its advocates and detractors.
Schulze STV is a draft single transferable vote (STV) ranked voting system designed to achieve proportional representation. It was invented by Markus Schulze, who developed the Schulze method for resolving ties using a Condorcet method. Schulze STV is similar to CPO-STV in that it compares possible winning candidate pairs and selects the Condorcet winner. It is not used in parliamentary elections.
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 winner-take-all electoral system is one where a voting bloc can win all seats in a legislature or electoral district, denying representation to any political minorities. Such systems are used in many major democracies. Such systems are sometimes called "majoritarian representation", though this term is a misnomer, as most such systems do not always elect majority preferred candidates and do not always produce winners who received majority of votes cast in the district, and they allow parties to take a majority of seats in the chamber with just a minority of the vote.
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 mix more than two components are sometimes called supermixed.
Apportionment in the Hellenic Parliament refers to those provisions of the Greek electoral law relating to the distribution of Greece's 300 parliamentary seats to the parliamentary constituencies, as well as to the method of seat allocation in Greek legislative elections for the various political parties. The electoral law was codified for the first time through a 2012 Presidential Decree. Articles 1, 2, and 3 deal with how the parliamentary seats are allocated to the various constituencies, while articles 99 and 100 legislate the method of parliamentary apportionment for political parties in an election. In both cases, Greece uses the largest remainder method.
A mixed single vote (MSV) is a type of ballot in mixed-member electoral systems, where voters cast a single vote in an election, which used both for electing a local candidate and as a vote for a party affiliated with that candidate according to the rules of the electoral system. Unlike most mixed proportional and mixed majoritarian systems where voters cast two votes, split-ticket voting is not possible under MSV. This significantly reduces the possibility of manipulating compensatory mixed systems, at the price of reducing voter choice. An alternative based on the mixed single vote that still allows for indicating different preferences on different levels is the mixed ballot, which functions as a preferential (mixed) single vote.
Mixed-member majoritarian representation (MMM) is type of a mixed electoral system combining winner-take-all and proportional methods, where the disproportional results of the winner-take-all part are dominant over the proportional component. Mixed member majoritarian systems are therefore categorized under semi-proportional representation, and are usually contrasted with mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) which aims to provide proportional representation compensation ("top-up") seats.
Compensation or correction is an optional mechanism of electoral systems, which corrects the results of one part of the system based on some criterion to achieve a certain result, usually to make it more proportional. There are in general two forms of compensation: vote linkage and seat linkage.
The vote linkage or (multi-tier) vote transfer system is type of compensatory mixed electoral system, where votes may be transferred across multiple tiers of an electoral system, in order to avoid wasted votes - in contrast to the more common seat linkage compensatory system. It often presupposes and is related to the concept of the mixed single vote, which means that the same vote can be use in multiple tiers of an electoral system and that a vote for a local candidate may automatically count as a vote for the candidate's party or the other way around. Voters usually cast their single vote for a local candidate in a single-member district (SMD) and then all the wasted votes from this lower tier are added to distribute seats between upper tier candidates, typically national party lists.