Electoral systems

April 2018
 What is an electoral system?

Electoral system: the set of rules governing the

conversion of votes into seats
The key elements of an electoral system include:
the electoral formula (plurality/majority, proportional, mixed,
or other);
the ballot structure (i.e. whether the voter votes for a
candidate or a party and whether the voter makes a single
choice or expresses a series of preferences);
the district magnitude (the number of representatives to the
legislature that a particular district elects).
 Why are electoral systems
important?
They have an impact on coherence and organization of a
country’s party system, government-coalition,
representation, etc. and hence on government
effectiveness.
Electoral systems may also help to ease or exacerbate
conflict.
They shape public policy outcomes and the behavior and
incentive structures of political actors.
 Different types of systems
 There are many different electoral systems currently in use, and different types
within those systems.
 They can be categorized into three broad families:
- plurality/majority systems
First Past The Post (FPTP), Block Vote (BV), Party Block Vote (PBV), Alternative Vote (AV), and
the Two‐Round System (TRS)
- proportional representation systems
List Proportional Representation (List PR) and the Single Transferable Vote (STV)
- mixed systems
Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) and Parallel systems

There are other systems such as the Single Non‐Transferable Vote (SNTV), the
Limited Vote (LV), and the Borda Count (BC) which do not fit neatly into any
category and can be regarded as three further sub‐families
 A. Plurality/majority systems
(e.g. FPTP, AV, TRS)

• There is only one seat per electoral district and only one candidate
can be elected from a given district.
• Under plurality, candidates can win a seat when they win the most
votes without necessarily winning over 50 percent of the vote.
• Under majoritarian systems (e.g. AV and TRS) try to ensure that the
winning candidate receives an absolute majority (i.e. over 50 per
cent), essentially by making use of voters’ second preferences to
produce a winner.
A1. Single-Member Plurality (SMP/FPTP)
• Often called First Past the Post (FPTP)
• One member elected per district.
• The candidate with the most votes is elected, majority not needed,
within single-member districts.
• Voters select one candidate on the ballot.
• USA, UK, India, Canada, Bangladesh, Botswana, Ghana, Jamaica,
Kenya, Nigeria, among others.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l83S2gT31-g
 A2. Majority Systems
• Alternative Vote

• Preferential or ordinal ballot, voters rank candidates on ballot.

• All ballots are counted on the basis of first preferences, if no one receives a majority
of the vote, then the last-place finisher is dropped off, and ballots for that candidate
are redistributed based on their second choices. This continues until a candidate
wins majority support.

• Australian House of Representatives

• Two-round system

• Works like the FPTP system; if no candidate reaches the majority in the first
round, the least successful candidates are eliminated and it is followed by a
second round of voting on a later date (usually) between the top two finishers.

• Used to elect parliaments in over 20 countries around the world. Common in

presidential elections around the world.

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoKlE1_vrYU FPTP compared with AV

B. Proportional representation (PR)
systems
• Aims to reduce the disparity between a party’s share of the national
vote and its share of the parliamentary seats
• If a major party wins 40 per cent of the votes, it should win
approximately 40 per cent of the seats, and a minor party with 10 per
cent of the votes should also gain 10 per cent of the legislative seats.
• Proportionality is usually achieved through party lists of candidates,
and these lists can be either open (where voters rank the candidates in
order of preference) or closed (where the ordering is in the hands of the
party leadership and is decided prior to the elections).
• In some cases, the entire country is treated as one large constituency:
Israel, Netherlands, Slovakia. More commonly, the country is divided
into a number of smaller constituencies.
 B.1. List PR
• The Party-list system is a voting system emphasizing proportional representation in multiple-winner elections.
• In this system, parties make lists of candidates to be elected, and seats get allocated to each party in proportion to th
number of votes the party receives. Voters may vote directly for the party, as in Hong Kong and Israel, or they ma
vote for candidates and that vote will pool to the party, as in Turkey and Finland.
• The order in which a party's list candidates get elected may be pre-determined by the party (a closed list system) or
may be determined by the voters at large (an open list system).

List System (closed) The List system (open)

Voters only vote for a party, not a person. Voters choose a number of candidates.
The parties draw up a list of candidates and puts them in order. Parties can stand as many candidates as there are seats.
Seats are allocated to parties according to the proportion of Seats are allocated according to the number of votes.
votes won.
These seats are then filled from the lists. The most popular candidates win the seats.

• Methods to award seats in list PR-systems:

• Perfect proportionality means (%) of votes = (%) of seats

• Argentina, Belgium, Benin, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic
Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, Indonesia
Israel, Latvia, Moldova, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru
Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland
Turkey, Uruguay.
B.2. Single Transferable Vote (STV)

• STV is a system of preferential voting designed to minimize wasted votes and provide proportional
representation while ensuring that votes are explicitly expressed for individual candidates rather
than for party lists.
• It achieves this by using multi-seat constituencies and by transferring all votes that would otherwise
be wasted to other eligible candidates. STV initially allocates an elector's vote to his or her most
preferred candidate and then, after candidates have been either elected or eliminated, transfers
surplus or unused votes according to the voter's stated preferences.
• Application of alternative vote to PR-systems.
• Politics in the Animal Kingdom: Single Transferable Vote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI
• Ireland, Malta
 * D’Hondt Method
• Under all party list systems, though, one still needs some method for allocating seats to individual
parties. One commonly used method is named for the nineteenth-century Belgian mathematician
Victor d’Hondt, and is normally referred to as a “highest average method using the d’Hondt
formula.”
• For example, assume that we have an election with 1,000 total voters in which five parties (A, B, C,
D, and E) have gained 100 (10%), 150 (15%), 300 (30%), 400 (40%), and 50 (5%) votes,
respectively. Assume also that, in our electoral constituency, there are 3 seats up for election; that all
votes cast are valid; and that the electoral system has a 7% vote threshold. (That is, parties must get
at least 7% of the total valid votes cast in order to participate in the distribution of seats.) Party E
would thus be elimiated from competition at the outset. The d’Hondt method of seat allocation then
proceeds in the following steps.
• 1. Place the total number of votes garnered by the competing parties (A, B, C, and D. E has been
eliminated) in a row. 100 150 300 400
• 2. Divide each figure in the row by 1, 2, 3, . . ., n. (How far you take the division varies. The more
seats you have to allocate, the further you have to divide. For our purposes, 3 or 4 divisions should
do the trick.)
 Party A Party B Party C Party D

100 150 300 400

div. by 1 100 150 300 400

div. by 2 50 75 150 200
div. by 3 33 50 100 133
div. by 4 25 37.5 75 100

• 3. Pick the highest quotient in the list (including the quotients obtained by dividing the votes by 1).
The highest quotient is “400” in the Party D column. We therefore award one seat to Party D.
• 4. Pick the next highest quotient in the list. The next highest quotient is “300” in the Party C column.
We therefore award one seat to Party C.
• 5. Pick the next highest quotient in the list. The next highest quotient is “200” in the Party D column.
We therefore award another seat to Party D. We have successfully filled all the seats available in this
constituency.
• The final results of the election are therefore:
• Party C 1 seat (or 33% of the total available seats)
Party D 2 seats (or 66% of the total available seats)
• Notice why we call this system “proportional representation:” Under a plurality system, Party D
would have received 100% of the seats because that party received a plurality (40%) of the vote--
even though 60% of voters voted against Party D by choosing other parties. Under PR, however, we
are able to represent some of the interests of the other voters. Party D’s representation in parliament
is reduced to 66% of seats, while Party C’s is increased to 33% of seats. The system yields a result
that is clearly not perfectly proportional. But the distribution more closely approximates the actual
percentage of votes that each party received than would a plurality or majority system.
• The d’Hondt method is only one way of allocating seats in party list systems. Other methods include
the Saint-Lague method where the divisor is the set of odd numbers (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, . . ., n) and
the modified Saint-Lague method used in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, where the divisor is 1.4
plus the set of odd numbers (1.4, 3, 5, 7, 9, . . . , n). Other methods divide the votes by a
mathematically derived quota, such as the Droop quota or the Hare quota (see below)
• One other feature of party list systems is called the vote threshold. Party list systems normally
establish by law an arbitrary percentage of the vote that parties have to pass before they can be
considered in the allocation of seats. The figure ranges from 0.67% in the Netherlands to 5% in
Germany and Russia, or even more. Any party that does not reach the threshold is excluded from the
calculation of seats. The vote threshold simplifies the process of seat allocation and discourages
fringe parties (those that are likely to gain very few votes) from competing in the elections.
Obviously, the higher the vote threshold, the fewer the parties that will be represented in parliament.
 C. Mixed Systems
C.1. Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)
• Combines the geographical representation of single-member districts with an
additional allotment of adjustment or compensatory seats allocated in terms of
proportional representation.
• The Additional Member System (AMS) is a branch of voting systems in which
some representatives are elected from geographic constituencies and others
are elected under proportional representation from a wider area, usually by
party lists. Voters have two votes, one for the party and the second for the
candidate in a constituency. The constituency representatives are generally
elected under the first-past-the-post voting system. The party representatives
are elected by a party vote, where the electors vote for a political party, and
usually not directly for an individual. The particular individuals selected come
from lists drawn up by the political parties before the election, at a national or
regional level.
• Bolivia, Germany, New Zealand, Venezuela
C.2. Parallel Systems
• Similarly combines single-member districts with PR, but there is no direct
relations between the two votes.
• Albania, Andorra, East Timor, Georgia, Guatemala, Japan, Lithuania, Macedonia,
Madagascar, Senegal, Seychelles, South Korea,Thailand
Electoral systems vary in the
following dimensions:
(1) District magnitude:
From single-member constituencies to whole-country constituencies
The bigger the constituency the more proportional

(2) Intra-party choice:

How much intra-party choice is there among candidates?
Single-member constituencies: No choice
PR-systems:
Closed lists: Party determines order of candidates
Preferential lists: Voters can express their preference

(3) Thresholds:
Electoral systems often contain some institutions to prevent very small parties from winning
seats:
Preventing fragmentation
Facilitating stable government

Thresholds are normally between 3-5% (Netherlands 0.67%, Russia 7%). Thresholds usually
exist at national level, rarely at constituency level.
 Link Electoral and Party Systems

1. Duverger (1954): electoral system  party system

versus

2. Rokkan (1970): social cleavages  party system  electoral system

And Jasiewicz (2003): political fragmentation  adoption PR (not other way
around, cf post-communist Europe)
And Miller (2005): cracks in two-party system BEFORE adoption of PR (based
on New Zealand’s introduction of PR in 1996)

Back to Lijphart

Lijphart’s executive-parties dimension

(how easy is it for one party to take control of the government?):
Fourth element: types of electoral systems

According to Lijphart, most important indicator of different types of political

systems, to distinguish consensus and majoritarian systems
 Discussion points
• What are the advantages (real or alleged) and disadvantages
(real or alleged) of PR and majority/plurality systems?
• What is the influence of mixed electoral systems on party systems?
• What is the influence of the majority electoral systems on party
systems?
• What is the influence of proportional electoral systems on party
systems?
• What is the influence of the plurinominal majority system used in
the US presidential election on the US party system?
• What is the influence of the electoral system on the party system in
the UK and France?