IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v215y2014i1p89-13610.1007-s10479-012-1141-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Asymptotic bias of some election methods

Author

Listed:
  • Svante Janson

Abstract

Consider an election where N seats are distributed among parties with proportions p 1 ,…,p m of the votes. We study, for the common divisor and quota methods, the asymptotic distribution, and in particular the mean, of the seat excess of a party, i.e. the difference between the number of seats given to the party and the (real) number Np i that yields exact proportionality. Our approach is to keep p 1 ,…,p m fixed and let N→∞, with N random in a suitable way. In particular, we give formulas showing the bias favouring large or small parties for the different election methods. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Svante Janson, 2014. "Asymptotic bias of some election methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 215(1), pages 89-136, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:215:y:2014:i:1:p:89-136:10.1007/s10479-012-1141-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-012-1141-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-012-1141-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-012-1141-2?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
    ---><---

    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. Grimmett, Geoffrey R., 2012. "European apportionment via the Cambridge Compromise," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 68-73.
    2. Udo Schwingenschlögl & Mathias Drton, 2004. "Seat allocation distributions and seat biases of stationary apportionment methods for proportional representation," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 191-202, September.
    3. Mathias Drton & Udo Schwingenschlögl, 2005. "Asymptotic seat bias formulas," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 23-31, September.
    4. Niemeyer, Horst F. & Niemeyer, Alice C., 2008. "Apportionment methods," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 240-253, September.
    5. Lothar Heinrich & Udo Schwingenschlögl, 2006. "Goodness-of-fit Criteria for the Adams and Jefferson Rounding Methods and their Limiting Laws," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 191-207, October.
    6. Schwingenschlögl, Udo & Drton, Mathias, 2006. "Seat excess variances of apportionment methods for proportional representation," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(16), pages 1723-1730, October.
    7. Gaffke, Norbert & Pukelsheim, Friedrich, 2008. "Divisor methods for proportional representation systems: An optimization approach to vector and matrix apportionment problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 166-184, September.
    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. Michel Le Breton & Karine Van Der Straeten, 2017. "Alliances Électorales et Gouvernementales : La Contribution de la Théorie des Jeux Coopératifs à la Science Politique," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 127(4), pages 637-736.
    2. Jarosław Flis & Wojciech Słomczyński & Dariusz Stolicki, 2020. "Pot and ladle: a formula for estimating the distribution of seats under the Jefferson–D’Hondt method," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 201-227, January.
    3. David F. Muñoz & Héctor Gardida & Hugo Velázquez & Jorge D. Ayala, 2022. "Simulation models to support the preliminary electoral results program for the Mexican Electoral Institute," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(2), pages 1141-1156, September.
    4. Karpov, Alexander, 2015. "Alliance incentives under the D’Hondt method," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-7.

    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. Schwingenschlögl, Udo, 2007. "Probabilities of majority and minority violation in proportional representation," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 77(17), pages 1690-1695, November.
    2. Heinrich Lothar & Pukelsheim Friedrich & Schwingenschlögl Udo, 2005. "On stationary multiplier methods for the rounding of probabilities and the limiting law of the Sainte-Laguë divergence," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 23(2/2005), pages 117-129, February.
    3. Schwingenschlögl, Udo & Drton, Mathias, 2006. "Seat excess variances of apportionment methods for proportional representation," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(16), pages 1723-1730, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Słomczyński, Wojciech & Życzkowski, Karol, 2012. "Mathematical aspects of degressive proportionality," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 94-101.
    6. Oelbermann, Kai-Friederike, 2016. "Alternate Scaling algorithm for biproportional divisor methods," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 25-32.
    7. Udo Schwingenschlögl, 2008. "Asymptotic Equivalence of Seat Bias Models," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 191-200, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Paolo Serafini, 2015. "Certificates of optimality for minimum norm biproportional apportionments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 1-12, January.
    10. Antonin Macé & Rafael Treibich, 2021. "Inducing Cooperation through Weighted Voting and Veto Power," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 70-111, August.
    11. 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.
    12. Péter Csóka & P. Jean-Jacques Herings, 2018. "Decentralized Clearing in Financial Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4681-4699, October.
    13. Kerem Akartunalı & Philip A. Knight, 2017. "Network models and biproportional rounding for fair seat allocations in the UK elections," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 253(1), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Daniele Pretolani, 2014. "Apportionments with minimum Gini index of disproportionality: a Quadratic Knapsack approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 215(1), pages 257-267, April.
    15. Jones, Michael A. & McCune, David & Wilson, Jennifer M., 2020. "New quota-based apportionment methods: The allocation of delegates in the Republican Presidential Primary," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 122-137.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Pajala, Tommi & Korhonen, Pekka & Malo, Pekka & Sinha, Ankur & Wallenius, Jyrki & Dehnokhalaji, Akram, 2018. "Accounting for political opinions, power, and influence: A Voting Advice Application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(2), pages 702-715.
    19. Katarzyna Cegiełka & Piotr Dniestrzański & Janusz Łyko & Arkadiusz Maciuk & Maciej Szczeciński, 2021. "A neutral core of degressively proportional allocations under lexicographic preferences of agents," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(4), pages 667-685, December.
    20. Jarosław Flis & Wojciech Słomczyński & Dariusz Stolicki, 2020. "Pot and ladle: a formula for estimating the distribution of seats under the Jefferson–D’Hondt method," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 201-227, January.

    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:spr:annopr:v:215:y:2014:i:1:p:89-136:10.1007/s10479-012-1141-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.