IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bre/polcon/18689.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is Brexit an opportunity to reform the European Parliament?

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Kalcik
  • Guntram B. Wolff

Abstract

The United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union will have implications for the European Parliament. Seventy-three of its 751 members are elected in the UK. Brexit offers a political opportunity to reform the allocation of seats to member states. The European Parliament is a highly unequal parliament- large countries are underrepresented while small countries are overrepresented. This is desired in the EU treaties. But the EU treaties also emphasise the...

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Kalcik & Guntram B. Wolff, 2017. "Is Brexit an opportunity to reform the European Parliament?," Policy Contributions 18689, Bruegel.
    • Handle: RePEc:bre:polcon:18689
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.bruegel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/PC-2017_02-Euro-Parl-310117.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loosemore, John & Hanby, Victor J., 1971. "The Theoretical Limits of Maximum Distortion: Some Analytic Expressions for Electoral Systems," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(4), pages 467-477, October.
    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. Edoardo Bressanelli & Nicola Chelotti & Wilhelm Lehmann, 2021. "Managing Disintegration: How the European Parliament Responded and Adapted to Brexit," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 16-26.

    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. Matthew Gould & Matthew D. Rablen, 2013. "Equitable Representation in the Councils of the United Nations: Theory and Application," CEDI Discussion Paper Series 13-07, Centre for Economic Development and Institutions(CEDI), Brunel University.
    2. Wada, Junichiro & Kamahara, Yuta, 2018. "Studying malapportionment using α-divergence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 77-89.
    3. Imai, Masami, 2022. "Local economic impacts of legislative malapportionment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Ocaña, Francisco & Oñate, Pablo, 2011. "IndElec: A Software for Analyzing Party Systems and Electoral Systems," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 42(i06).
    5. Nicolas Boccard, 2023. "Electoral inequity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 35(2), pages 100-125, April.
    6. Galina Borisyuk & Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher, 2004. "Selecting Indexes of Electoral Proportionality: General Properties and Relationships," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 51-74, February.
    7. Matthew Gould & Matthew D. Rablen, 2016. "Equitable representation in councils: theory and an application to the United Nations Security Council," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 19-51, October.
    8. Jean Pierre TRANCHANT & Grégoire ROTA-GRAZIOSI & Léandre BASSOLE & Jean-Louis ARCAND, 2006. "The Making of a (vice-) President: Party Politics, Ethnicity, Village Loyalty and Community-Driven Development," Working Papers 200633, CERDI.
    9. Matthew Gould & Matthew D. Rablen, 2017. "Reform of the United Nations Security Council: equity and efficiency," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 145-168, October.
    10. Paulo Trigo Pereira & João Andrade e Silva, 2007. "Citizens’ Freedom to Choose Representatives: Ballot Structure, Proportionality and “Fragmented” Parliaments," Working Papers Department of Economics 2007/13, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    11. Frantisek Turnovec, 2012. "Fair Qualified Majorities in Weighted Voting Bodies," EcoMod2012 4277, EcoMod.
    12. Miguel Martínez-Panero & Verónica Arredondo & Teresa Peña & Victoriano Ramírez, 2019. "A New Quota Approach to Electoral Disproportionality," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, March.
    13. Junichiro Wada, 2010. "Evaluating the Unfairness of Representation With the Nash Social Welfare Function," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 445-467, October.
    14. Kaare Strom, 1989. "Inter-party Competition in Advanced Democracies," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 1(3), pages 277-300, July.
    15. Arend Lijphart, 1992. "Democratization and Constitutional Choices in Czecho-Slovakia, Hungary and Poland 1989-91," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 4(2), pages 207-223, April.
    16. Camilo Campos-Valdés & Eduardo Álvarez-Miranda & Mauricio Morales Quiroga & Jordi Pereira & Félix Liberona Durán, 2021. "The Impact of Candidates’ Profile and Campaign Decisions in Electoral Results: A Data Analytics Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, April.
    17. D. Bouyssou & T. Marchant & M. Pirlot, 2020. "A characterization of two disproportionality and malapportionment indices: the Duncan and Duncan index and the Lijphart index," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 284(1), pages 147-163, January.
    18. Jonathan Cervas & Bernard Grofman, 2020. "Legal, Political Science, and Economics Approaches to Measuring Malapportionment: The U.S. House, Senate, and Electoral College 1790–2010," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2238-2256, October.
    19. Skye Christensen & Gabrielle Bardall, 2014. "Gender Quotas in Single-Member District Electoral Systems," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/104, European University Institute.
    20. Alfano, Maria Rosaria & Baraldi, Anna Laura & Papagni, Erasmo, 2014. "Electoral Systems and Corruption: the Effect of the Proportionality Degree," MPRA Paper 53138, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 11 Nov 2013.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bre:polcon:18689. 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: Bruegel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bruegbe.html .

    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.