From plurality rule to proportional representation
I consider the decision of a parliament that might change the electoral system for the forthcoming elections from plurality rule to proportional representation. Parties are o¢ ce-motivated. They care about winning and about the share of seats obtained. I consider two di¤erent scenarios of how parties in the government share the spoils of o¢ ce: Equally or proportionally to their share of seats. If the government is formed by a single party and parties expect that each party will obtain the same share of votes in the next election the electoral rule will never be changed. That is, for a change to occur the government should be formed by a coalition. I ?nd that a change is more likely to occur when the number of parties is larger and also when the spoils of o¢ ce are shared equally among the members in the governing coalition. I extend these results to analyze the decision of a change from a less proportional rule to a more proportional one.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 11 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10101/PS2|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- John Maloney & Bernard Pearson & Andrew Pickering, 2003.
"Behind the Cube Rule: Implications of, and Evidence against a Fractal Electoral Geography,"
Environment and Planning A,
SAGE Publishing, vol. 35(8), pages 1405-1414, August.
- John Maloney & Bernard Pearson & Andrew Pickering, 2003. "Behind the cube rule: implications of, and evidence against a fractal electoral geography," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 35(8), pages 1405-1414, August.
- John Maloney & Bernard Pearson & Andrew Pickering, 2001. "Behind the cube rule: implications of, and evidence against a fractal electoral geography," Discussion Papers 0103, Exeter University, Department of Economics.
- Josep M. Colomer, 2005.
"It's Parties That Choose Electoral Systems (or, Duverger's Laws Upside Down),"
Political Studies Association, vol. 53, pages 1-21, 03.
- Josep M. Colomer, 2005. "It's parties that choose electoral systems (or Duverger's Law upside down)," Economics Working Papers 812, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Carles Boix, 1999. "Setting the rules of the game: The choice of electoral systems in advanced democracies," Economics Working Papers 367, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ecogov:v:11:y:2010:i:4:p:373-408. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.