IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/isp/journl/v9y2015i1p118-126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Disproportion Of Allocation Under The Given Boundary Conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Piotr Dniestrzański
  • Janusz Łyko

Abstract

There are several well known measures of the inequality of distribution of goods and burdens. One of them is for example the Gini coefficient. Applicability of such measures is limited when the use of disproportionate allocation was intended. This is the case in the allocation of seats in the European Parliament. The Treaty of Lisbon provides that the distribution is done according to degressive proportionality with the specified minimum and maximum number of seats allocated to the smallest and largest Member State. These two conditions called boundary conditions at the outset determine the deviation from the proportional division. Therefore, there arises a problem of determining the measure of the disproportion of allocation under the given boundary conditions. This article comprises the proposals for such measures and their application for the analysis of the distribution of seats in the European Parliament.

Suggested Citation

  • Piotr Dniestrzański & Janusz Łyko, 2015. "The Disproportion Of Allocation Under The Given Boundary Conditions," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 9(1), pages 118-126.
    • Handle: RePEc:isp:journl:v:9:y:2015:i:1:p:118-126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.scientific-publications.net/get/1000012/1440158588197068.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lidia Ceriani & Paolo Verme, 2015. "Individual Diversity and the Gini Decomposition," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 637-646, April.
    2. Rose, Richard & Bernhagen, Patrick & Borz, Gabriela, 2012. "Evaluating competing criteria for allocating parliamentary seats," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 85-89.
    3. Blanca L Delgado-Márquez & Michael Kaeding & Antonio Palomares, 2013. "A more balanced composition of the European Parliament with degressive proportionality," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(3), pages 458-471, September.
    4. Geoffrey Grimmett & Jean-François Laslier & Friedrich Pukelsheim & Victoriano Ramirez Gonzalez & Richard J. Rose & Wojciech Slomczynski & Martin Zachariasen & Karol Życzkowski, 2011. "The allocation between the EU member states of the seats in the European Parliament Cambridge Compromise," Working Papers hal-00609946, HAL.
    5. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sergey Shashnov & Maxim Kotsemir, 2018. "Research landscape of the BRICS countries: current trends in research output, thematic structures of publications, and the relative influence of partners," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1115-1155, November.

    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. Laslier, Jean-François, 2012. "Why not proportional?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 90-93.
    2. Markus Brill & Jean-François Laslier & Piotr Skowron, 2018. "Multiwinner approval rules as apportionment methods," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 30(3), pages 358-382, July.
    3. Silvia De Nicol`o & Maria Rosaria Ferrante & Silvia Pacei, 2021. "Mind the Income Gap: Bias Correction of Inequality Estimators in Small-Sized Samples," Papers 2107.08950, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    4. 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.
    5. Matakos, Konstantinos & Savolainen, Riikka & Troumpounis, Orestis & Tukiainen, Janne & Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2018. "Electoral Institutions and Intraparty Cohesion," Working Papers 109, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Anson Au, 2023. "Reassessing the econometric measurement of inequality and poverty: toward a cost-of-living approach," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Grimmett, G.R. & Oelbermann, K.-F. & Pukelsheim, F., 2012. "A power-weighted variant of the EU27 Cambridge Compromise," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 136-140.
    9. Kellermann, Thomas, 2012. "The minimum-based procedure: A principled way to allocate seats in the European Parliament," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 102-106.
    10. Iñaki Permanyer & Nicolai Suppa, 2022. "Racing ahead or lagging behind? Territorial cohesion in human development around the globe," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(12), pages 2086-2101, December.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Biró, Péter & Kóczy, László Á. & Sziklai, Balázs, 2015. "Fair apportionment in the view of the Venice Commission’s recommendation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 32-41.
    15. Kazuya Kikuchi, 2022. "Welfare ordering of voting weight allocations," Papers 2208.05316, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    16. Allen, Trevor J. & Taagepera, Rein, 2017. "Seat allocation in federal second chambers: Logical models in Canada and Germany," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 22-30.
    17. Grimmett, Geoffrey R., 2012. "European apportionment via the Cambridge Compromise," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 68-73.
    18. Luciano Rossoni & Rodrigo Assunção Rosa, 2024. "Reducing the Matthew Effect on Journal Citations through an Inclusive Indexing Logic: The Brazilian Spell (Scientific Periodicals Electronic Library) Experience," Publications, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, February.
    19. Słomczyński, Wojciech & Życzkowski, Karol, 2012. "Mathematical aspects of degressive proportionality," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 94-101.
    20. de Mouzon, Olivier & Laurent, Thibault & Le Breton, Michel, 2020. "One Man, One Vote Part 2: Measurement of Malapportionment and Disproportionality and the Lorenz Curve," TSE Working Papers 20-1089, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    degressive proportionality; measure of degression; the boundary conditions; gini coefficient;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A - General Economics and Teaching

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:isp:journl:v:9:y:2015:i:1:p:118-126. 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: Svetoslav Ivanov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.scientific-publications.net/ .

    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.