IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ksa/szemle/1343.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Választókörzetek igazságosan?
[Fair apportionment of voting districts in Hungary]

Author

Listed:
  • Kóczy Á., László
  • Biró, Péter
  • Sziklai, Balázs

Abstract

Az új választási törvény egyik célja a korábbinál igazságosabb választási körzetek kialakítása. Ezt a Velencei Bizottság választási kódexében megfogalmazott ajánlásokhoz hasonló, bár azoknál némileg megengedőbb szabályok révén biztosítja. A szabályok rögzítik a körzetek számát, illetve hogy a körzetek nem oszthatnak ketté kisebb településeket, és nem nyúlhatnak át a megyehatárokon. Tanulmányunkban belátjuk, hogy a szabályok betartása mellett a körzetek kialakítása matematikailag lehetetlen. Javaslatot teszünk a probléma optimális megoldására elvi alapon is, vizsgáljuk a módszer tulajdonságait, majd az általunk megfogalmazott hatékony algoritmussal, a 2010. évi országgyűlési választások adatainak felhasználásával meghatározzuk a körzetek megyék közti elosztásának legjobb megoldását. Végül kitérünk a demográfiai változások várható hatásaira, és több javaslatot teszünk a korlátok hosszú távú betartására: javasoljuk a választási körzetek számának körülbelül 130-ra növelését; egy-egy felülvizsgálat alkalmával a választási körzetek számának megváltoztathatóságát; illetve a körzetek megyék helyett régiók szerinti szervezését.* Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) kód: D72, D78, D62.

Suggested Citation

  • Kóczy Á., László & Biró, Péter & Sziklai, Balázs, 2012. "Választókörzetek igazságosan? [Fair apportionment of voting districts in Hungary]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1165-1186.
  • Handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:1343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kszemle.hu/tartalom/letoltes.php?id=1343
    Download Restriction: Registration and subscription. 3-month embargo period to non-subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hans Pitlik & Friedrich Schneider & Harald Strotmann, 2006. "Legislative Malapportionment and the Politicization of Germany's Intergovernmental Transfer System," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(6), pages 637-662, November.
    2. Stephen Coate & Brian Knight, 2007. "Socially Optimal Districting: A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(4), pages 1409-1471.
    3. Demange, Gabrielle, 2012. "On party-proportional representation under district distortions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 181-191.
    4. Samuels, David & Snyder, Richard, 2001. "The Value of a Vote: Malapportionment in Comparative Perspective," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 651-671, October.
    5. Salvador Barbera & Matthew O. Jackson, 2006. "On the Weights of Nations: Assigning Voting Weights in a Heterogeneous Union," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(2), pages 317-339, April.
    6. Luc Lauwers & Tom Van Puyenbroeck, 2006. "The Hamilton Apportionment Method Is Between the Adams Method and the Jefferson Method," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 390-397, May.
    7. Kóczy Á., László, 2011. "Lisszaboni kilátások [Lisbon prospects]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1045-1058.
    8. Attila Tasnádi, 2011. "The political districting problem: A survey," Society and Economy, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 33(3), pages 543-554, December.
    9. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2010. "Strategic Redistricting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1616-1641, September.
    10. Paul H. Edelman, 2006. "Minimum Total Deviation Apportionments," Studies in Choice and Welfare, in: Bruno Simeone & Friedrich Pukelsheim (ed.), Mathematics and Democracy, pages 55-64, Springer.
    11. Oscar R. Burt & Curtis C. Harris, 1963. "Letter to the Editor---Apportionment of the U.S. House of Representatives: A Minimum Range, Integer Solution, Allocation Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 648-652, August.
    12. Kóczy Á., László & Pintér, Miklós, 2011. "Az ellenzék ereje - általánosított súlyozott szavazási játékok [Minority power - generalized weighted voting games]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 543-551.
    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. Laszlo A. Koczy & Peter Biro & Balazs Sziklai, 2017. "US vs. European Apportionment Practices: The Conflict between Monotonicity and Proportionality," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1716, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    2. 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.
    3. Csóka, Péter & Kondor, Gábor, 2019. "Delegációk igazságos kiválasztása társadalmi választások elméletével [Choosing a fair delegation by social choice theory]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 771-787.
    4. Bittó, Virág, 2017. "Az Imperiali és Macau politikai választókörzet-kiosztási módszerek empirikus vizsgálata [Empirical Analysis of the Imperiali and Macau Apportionment Methods]," MPRA Paper 79554, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. 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.
    2. Balázs R Sziklai & Károly Héberger, 2020. "Apportionment and districting by Sum of Ranking Differences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Laszlo A. Koczy & Balazs Sziklai, 2018. "Bounds on Malapportionment," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1801, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    4. Clemens Puppe & Attila Tasnádi, 2015. "Axiomatic districting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 31-50, January.
    5. Francesco De Sinopoli & Leo Ferraris & Giovanna Iannantuoni, 2013. "Electing a parliament," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 715-737, March.
    6. Wada, Junichiro & Kamahara, Yuta, 2018. "Studying malapportionment using α-divergence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 77-89.
    7. John N. Friedman & Richard Holden, 2020. "Optimal Gerrymandering in a competitive environment," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 347-367, October.
    8. Imai, Masami, 2022. "Local economic impacts of legislative malapportionment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    9. Kai Hao Yang & Alexander K. Zentefis, 2022. "Gerrymandering and the Limits of Representative Democracy," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2328, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    10. Justin Svec & James Hamilton, 2013. "Endogenous Voting Weights for Elected Representatives and Redistricting," Working Papers 1307, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    11. Bittó, Virág, 2017. "Az Imperiali és Macau politikai választókörzet-kiosztási módszerek empirikus vizsgálata [Empirical Analysis of the Imperiali and Macau Apportionment Methods]," MPRA Paper 79554, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Hideo Konishi & Chen‐Yu Pan, 2020. "Partisan and bipartisan gerrymandering," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(5), pages 1183-1212, September.
    13. Hyytinen, Ari & Saarimaa, Tuukka & Tukiainen, Janne, 2014. "Electoral vulnerability and size of local governments: Evidence from voting on municipal mergers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 193-204.
    14. De Santo, Alessia & Le Maux, Benoît, 2023. "On the optimal size of legislatures: An illustrated literature review," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    15. Tom Van Puyenbroeck, 2008. "Proportional Representation, Gini Coefficients, and the Principle of Transfers," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 498-526, October.
    16. Paul Edelman, 2015. "Voting power apportionments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(4), pages 911-925, April.
    17. Oskari Harjunen & Tuukka Saarimaa & Janne Tukiainen, 2021. "Love Thy (Elected) Neighbor? Residential Segregation, Political Representation and Local Public Goods," Discussion Papers 138, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    18. Justin Svec & James Hamilton, 2015. "Endogenous voting weights for elected representatives and redistricting," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 434-441, December.
    19. Sebastian Galiani & Iván Torre & Gustavo Torrens, 2016. "Fiscal Federalism and Legislative Malapportionment: Causal Evidence from Independent but Related Natural Experiments," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 133-159, March.
    20. Tiberiu Dragu & Jonathan Rodden, 2010. "Representation and regional redistribution in federations," Working Papers 2010/16, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities

    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:ksa:szemle:1343. 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: Odon Sok (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kszemle.hu .

    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.