IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v41y2004i7p1367-1393.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equalising Votes but Enabling Bias: The Electoral Impact of the 1977 and 1999 Ward Boundary Reviews in London

Author

Listed:
  • Colin Railings

    (Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK, crallings@plymouth.ac.uk)

  • Ron Johnston

    (School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, University Road, Bristol, BS8 ISS, UK, R.Johnston@bristol.ac.uk)

  • Michael Thrasher

    (Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK, michael.thrasher@plymouth.ac.uk)

Abstract

The boundaries of electoral units in Britain are periodically reviewed in order to enact the democratic principle of 'one person, one vote, one value'. The Commission-led reviews of local ward boundaries in London in the late 1970s and late 1990s both successfully reduced the variance in elector-councillor ratios within individual London boroughs and thereby helped to remove any bias in election outcomes stemming from malapportionment. However, other factors such as the efficiency with which a party's vote was distributed, the impact of differing levels of turnout and the intervention and success of third parties all remained crucial in determining the precise relationship between votes cast and seats won. It is impossible to ensure that all votes are equal under the 'first-past-the-post' system because these other components of electoral bias are either not subject to review, or amenable to manipulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Colin Railings & Ron Johnston & Michael Thrasher, 2004. "Equalising Votes but Enabling Bias: The Electoral Impact of the 1977 and 1999 Ward Boundary Reviews in London," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(7), pages 1367-1393, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:41:y:2004:i:7:p:1367-1393
    DOI: 10.1080/0042098042000214842
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/0042098042000214842
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0042098042000214842?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rossiter, D. J. & Johnston, R. J. & Pattie, C. J., 1997. "Redistricting and Electoral Bias in Great Britain," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 453-472, July.
    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. Michael Haman, 2021. "Recall Elections: A Tool of Accountability? Evidence from Peru," Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, Universidad de los Andes,Facultad de Economía, CEDE, vol. 87(3), March.

    More about this item

    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:sae:urbstu:v:41:y:2004:i:7:p:1367-1393. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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.