IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/nhhfms/2021_009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Structure of MMP-Elections

Author

Listed:
  • Stensholt, Eivind

    (Dept. of Business and Management Science, Norwegian School of Economics)

Abstract

In MMP-elections (Mixed Member Proportional representation), a QP-ballot contains a first-vote for party Q’s candidate in a single-seat constituency and a second-vote for a list of candidates from party P in one common tally. In split ballots P≠Q. Traditional accounting does not record the ballot’s combination of first- and second-vote; collecting them in separate ballot boxes will not change the result. In the case of Bundestag elections, the assembly size is out of control, with 111 (136) extra-ordinary list seats in 2017 (2021). Faithful accounting makes use of these combinations to stabilize the assembly size at some given norm (598 seats in the Bundestag), while still complying with MMP’s proportionality rule. The Federal Constitutional Court emphasizes the principle of all voters’ equal influence on the result. In 2017 and 2021 split QP-ballots often gave full support to two winners, but QQ-ballots only to one (Q=CSU). If two ballots are from the same constituency, faithful accounting, gives them equal influence. Under traditional accounting, a fusion of the sister parties CDU/CSU to one party “C*U” would reduce the size to 667 (598) seats in 2017 (2021).

Suggested Citation

  • Stensholt, Eivind, 2021. "The Structure of MMP-Elections," Discussion Papers 2021/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:nhhfms:2021_009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2834479
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mudambi, Ram & Navarra, Pietro, 2004. "Electoral strategies in mixed systems of representation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 227-253, March.
    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. Bernecker, Andreas, 2014. "Do politicians shirk when reelection is certain? Evidence from the German parliament," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 55-70.
    2. Stensholt, Eivind, 2019. "MMP-elections and the assembly size," Discussion Papers 2019/15, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    3. Fedeli, Silvia & Forte, Francesco & Leonida, Leone, 2014. "The law of survival of the political class: An analysis of the Italian parliament (1946–2013)," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 102-121.
    4. Stensholt, Eivind, 2021. "Mixed Member Proportional with faithful accounting," Discussion Papers 2021/5, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    5. Mario Daniele Amore & Margherita Corina, 2021. "Political elections and corporate investment: International evidence," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(9), pages 1775-1796, December.
    6. Stensholt, Eivind, 2021. "Faithful accounting in MMP-elections," Discussion Papers 2021/7, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    7. Stensholt, Eivind, 2020. "Mixed Member Proportional; equal influence and assembly size," Discussion Papers 2020/10, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mixed member proportional; equal influence; legitimacy; assembly size; faithful accounting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    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:hhs:nhhfms:2021_009. 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: Stein Fossen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dfnhhno.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.