IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v6y2023i2d10.1007_s42001-023-00217-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-balanced redistricting

Author

Listed:
  • Daryl DeFord

    (Washington State University)

  • Elliot Kimsey

    (Washington State University, Program in Data Analytics)

  • Ryan Zerr

    (University of North Dakota)

Abstract

The one person–one vote principle for political redistricting requires balancing populations across districts. We address the matter of simultaneously balancing a second attribute across districts, proving that this is always possible to within reasonable tolerances. Feasibility is demonstrated by formulating the problem as a constrained partitioning problem on graphs. The resulting computational results demonstrate the practicality of obtaining dual-balanced districts whose balance for both attributes is well within reasonable deviations from the ideal values. Applications include attempts to avoid differential population growth leading to malapportionment between decennial census counts or simultaneously balancing total and voting-age populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Daryl DeFord & Elliot Kimsey & Ryan Zerr, 2023. "Multi-balanced redistricting," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 923-941, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:6:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-023-00217-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-023-00217-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-023-00217-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42001-023-00217-8?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. Amariah Becker & Dara Gold, 2022. "The gameability of redistricting criteria," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1735-1777, November.
    2. Daryl DeFord & Moon Duchin & Justin Solomon, 2020. "A Computational Approach to Measuring Vote Elasticity and Competitiveness," Statistics and Public Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 69-86, January.
    3. Katz, Jonathan N. & King, Gary & Rosenblatt, Elizabeth, 2020. "Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Evaluations of Partisan Fairness in District-Based Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(1), pages 164-178, February.
    4. Barnes, Richard & Solomon, Justin, 2021. "Gerrymandering and Compactness: Implementation Flexibility and Abuse," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(4), pages 448-466, October.
    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. Kiera W. Dobbs & Rahul Swamy & Douglas M. King & Ian G. Ludden & Sheldon H. Jacobson, 2024. "An Optimization Case Study in Analyzing Missouri Redistricting," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 54(2), pages 162-187, March.
    2. Swamy, Rahul & King, Douglas M. & Ludden, Ian G. & Dobbs, Kiera W. & Jacobson, Sheldon H., 2024. "A practical optimization framework for political redistricting: A case study in Arizona," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    3. Amariah Becker & Dara Gold, 2022. "The gameability of redistricting criteria," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1735-1777, November.
    4. Bierbrauer, Felix & Polborn, Mattias, 2020. "Competitive Gerrymandering and the Popular Vote," CEPR Discussion Papers 15401, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Barry Burden & Corwin Smidt, 2020. "Evaluating Legislative Districts Using Measures of Partisan Bias and Simulations," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, December.
    6. Benadè, Gerdus & Ho-Nguyen, Nam & Hooker, J.N., 2022. "Political districting without geography," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    7. Jeanne Clelland & Haley Colgate & Daryl DeFord & Beth Malmskog & Flavia Sancier-Barbosa, 2022. "Colorado in context: Congressional redistricting and competing fairness criteria in Colorado," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 189-226, May.
    8. Anton Kolotilin & Alexander Wolitzky, 2020. "The Economics of Partisan Gerrymandering," Discussion Papers 2020-12, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    9. Christopher Warshaw & Eric McGhee & Michal Migurski, 2022. "Districts for a New Decade—Partisan Outcomes and Racial Representation in the 2021–22 Redistricting Cycle," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 52(3), pages 428-451.
    10. Sarah Cannon & Ari Goldbloom-Helzner & Varun Gupta & JN Matthews & Bhushan Suwal, 2023. "Voting Rights, Markov Chains, and Optimization by Short Bursts," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 1-38, March.
    11. Ewa Szymczyk & Mateusz Bukowski & Jeffrey Raymond Kenworthy, 2024. "Understanding the Relationship between Urban Form and Urban Shrinkage among Medium-Sized Cities in Poland and Its Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-34, August.
    12. Aaron Brick & Cameron Brick, 2021. "Districting that minimizes partisan bias," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, December.
    13. Serhat Hasancebi, 2023. "The Maltese single transferable vote experience: a case study of gerrymandering?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 572-597, December.
    14. David Niven & Barbara Harris Combs & Carolette Norwood & Kalyn E. Rossiter & Michael E. Solimine, 2022. "The boundaries of confusion: Gerrymandering and racial disparities in state House and congressional district line congruity," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(6), pages 1507-1518, November.
    15. Michael Geruso & Dean Spears & Ishaana Talesara, 2022. "Inversions in US Presidential Elections: 1836–2016," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 327-357, January.
    16. Andrei Gomberg & Romans Pancs & Tridib Sharma, 2023. "Electoral Maldistricting," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1223-1264, August.

    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:jcsosc:v:6:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-023-00217-8. 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.