IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jecomi/v7y2019i1p17-d211159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Quota Approach to Electoral Disproportionality

Author

Listed:
  • Miguel Martínez-Panero

    (PRESAD Research Group, BORDA Research Unit, IMUVa, Departamento de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Valladolid, 47011 Valladolid, Spain)

  • Verónica Arredondo

    (PRESAD Research Group, Unidad Académica de Matemáticas, Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas, Zacatecas 98000, Mexico)

  • Teresa Peña

    (PRESAD Research Group, BORDA Research Unit, IMUVa, Departamento de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Valladolid, 47011 Valladolid, Spain)

  • Victoriano Ramírez

    (Departamento de Matemática Aplicada, Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

Abstract

In this paper electoral disproportionality is split into two types: (1) Forced or unavoidable, due to the very nature of the apportionment problem; and (2) non-forced. While disproportionality indexes proposed in the literature do not distinguish between such components, we design an index, called “quota index”, just measuring avoidable disproportionality. Unlike the previous indexes, the new one can be zero in real situations. Furthermore, this index presents an interesting interpretation concerning transfers of seats. Properties of the quota index and relationships with some usual disproportionality indexes are analyzed. Finally, an empirical approach is undertaken for different countries and elections.

Suggested Citation

  • Miguel Martínez-Panero & Verónica Arredondo & Teresa Peña & Victoriano Ramírez, 2019. "A New Quota Approach to Electoral Disproportionality," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jecomi:v:7:y:2019:i:1:p:17-:d:211159
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/7/1/17/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/7/1/17/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Galina Borisyuk & Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher, 2004. "Selecting Indexes of Electoral Proportionality: General Properties and Relationships," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 51-74, February.
    2. Balinski, Michel & Ramirez, Victoriano, 1999. "Parametric methods of apportionment, rounding and production," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 107-122, March.
    3. Tom Van Puyenbroeck, 2008. "Proportional Representation, Gini Coefficients, and the Principle of Transfers," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 498-526, October.
    4. Moshe Koppel & Abraham Diskin, 2009. "Measuring disproportionality, volatility and malapportionment: axiomatization and solutions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 281-286, August.
    5. Loosemore, John & Hanby, Victor J., 1971. "The Theoretical Limits of Maximum Distortion: Some Analytic Expressions for Electoral Systems," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(4), pages 467-477, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. D. Bouyssou & T. Marchant & M. Pirlot, 2020. "A characterization of two disproportionality and malapportionment indices: the Duncan and Duncan index and the Lijphart index," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 284(1), pages 147-163, January.
    2. Junichiro Wada, 2010. "Evaluating the Unfairness of Representation With the Nash Social Welfare Function," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 445-467, October.
    3. Matthew Gould & Matthew D. Rablen, 2013. "Equitable Representation in the Councils of the United Nations: Theory and Application," CEDI Discussion Paper Series 13-07, Centre for Economic Development and Institutions(CEDI), Brunel University.
    4. Wada, Junichiro & Kamahara, Yuta, 2018. "Studying malapportionment using α-divergence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 77-89.
    5. Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "Comparing votes and seats with a diagonal (dis-) proportionality measure, using the slope-diagonal deviation (SDD) with cosine, sine and sign," MPRA Paper 80833, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Aug 2017.
    6. Imai, Masami, 2022. "Local economic impacts of legislative malapportionment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    7. Santiago Carbó Valverde & Antonio Palomares Bautista & Victoriano Ramírez González, 2004. "La regulación de los órganos de gobierno de las cajas de ahorros: consideraciones electorales," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 171(4), pages 33-55, december.
    8. Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "Comparing votes and seats with a diagonal (dis-) proportionality measure, using the slope-diagonal deviation (SDD) with cosine, sine and sign," MPRA Paper 80965, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Aug 2017.
    9. Nicolas Boccard, 2023. "Electoral inequity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 35(2), pages 100-125, April.
    10. Galina Borisyuk & Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher, 2004. "Selecting Indexes of Electoral Proportionality: General Properties and Relationships," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 51-74, February.
    11. Jean Pierre TRANCHANT & Grégoire ROTA-GRAZIOSI & Léandre BASSOLE & Jean-Louis ARCAND, 2006. "The Making of a (vice-) President: Party Politics, Ethnicity, Village Loyalty and Community-Driven Development," Working Papers 200633, CERDI.
    12. Matthew Gould & Matthew D. Rablen, 2017. "Reform of the United Nations Security Council: equity and efficiency," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 145-168, October.
    13. Camilo Campos-Valdés & Eduardo Álvarez-Miranda & Mauricio Morales Quiroga & Jordi Pereira & Félix Liberona Durán, 2021. "The Impact of Candidates’ Profile and Campaign Decisions in Electoral Results: A Data Analytics Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, April.
    14. Palomares, Antonio & Pukelsheim, Friedrich & Ramírez, Victoriano, 2016. "The whole and its parts: On the coherence theorem of Balinski and Young," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 11-19.
    15. Patrick Francois & Francesco Trebbi & Kairong Xiao, 2023. "Factions in Nondemocracies: Theory and Evidence From the Chinese Communist Party," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(2), pages 565-603, March.
    16. Douglas W. Rae, 1995. "Using District Magnitude to Regulate Political Party Competition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 65-75, Winter.
    17. Svante Linusson & Gustav Ryd, 2014. "Dynamic adjustment: an electoral method for relaxed double proportionality," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 215(1), pages 183-199, April.
    18. Michel Balinski & Victoriano Ramirez, 2014. "Parametric vs. divisor methods of apportionment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 215(1), pages 39-48, April.
    19. Colignatus, Thomas, 2018. "An overview of the elementary statistics of correlation, R-squared, cosine, sine, and regression through the origin, with application to votes and seats for Parliament," MPRA Paper 84722, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 20 Feb 2018.
    20. Aaron Brick & Cameron Brick, 2021. "Districting that minimizes partisan bias," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jecomi:v:7:y:2019:i:1:p:17-:d:211159. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.