IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pkk/wpaper/1204.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fair apportionment of voting districts in Hungary?

Author

Listed:
  • László Á. Kóczy

    (Óbuda University)

  • Péter Biró

    (MTA Közgazdasági és Regionális Tudományi Kutatóközpont)

  • Balázs Sziklai

    (MTA Közgazdasági és Regionális Tudományi Kutatóközpont)

Abstract

One of the aims of the new electoral law of Hungary has been to define a fairer apportionment into voting districts. This is ensured by a set of rules slightly more premissive than those laid out in the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters of the Venice Commission. These rules fix the average size of the voting districts, require voting districts not to split smaller towns and villages and not to cross county borders. We show that such an apportionment is mathematically impossible. We make suggestions both to the theoretical approach to resolve this problem, study the properties of our approach and using our efficient algorithm and the data of the 2010 national elections we determine the optimal apportionment. We also study the expected effect of demographic changes and formulate recommendations to adhere to the rules over the long term: increase the number of voting districts to about 130, allow the number of voting districts to change flexibly at each revision of the districts and base the districts on regions rather than counties.

Suggested Citation

  • László Á. Kóczy & Péter Biró & Balázs Sziklai, 2012. "Fair apportionment of voting districts in Hungary?," Working Paper Series 1204, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:pkk:wpaper:1204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://uni-obuda.hu/users/vecseya/RePEc/pkk/wpaper/1204.pdf
    File Function: Manuscript, 2009
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Perry, Motty & Reny, Philip J, 1994. "A Noncooperative View of Coalition Formation and the Core," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 795-817, July.
    2. Huang, Chen-Ying & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2006. "Implementation of the recursive core for partition function form games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 771-793, September.
    3. Ray, Debraj, 2007. "A Game-Theoretic Perspective on Coalition Formation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199207954.
    4. Ray, Debraj & Vohra, Rajiv, 1997. "Equilibrium Binding Agreements," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 30-78, March.
    5. Sang-Seung, Yi, 1996. "Endogenous formation of customs unions under imperfect competition: open regionalism is good," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 153-177, August.
    6. Eyckmans, Johan & Tulkens, Henry, 2003. "Simulating coalitionally stable burden sharing agreements for the climate change problem," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 299-327, October.
    7. Kalyan Chatterjee & Bhaskar Dutia & Debraj Ray & Kunal Sengupta, 2013. "A Noncooperative Theory of Coalitional Bargaining," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Bargaining in the Shadow of the Market Selected Papers on Bilateral and Multilateral Bargaining, chapter 5, pages 97-111, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Fershtman, Chaim, 1989. "Fixed rules and decision rules : Time consistency and subgame perfection," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 191-194, September.
    9. Parkash Chander & Henry Tulkens, 2006. "A Core-Theoretic Solution for the Design of Cooperative Agreements on Transfrontier Pollution," Springer Books, in: Parkash Chander & Jacques Drèze & C. Knox Lovell & Jack Mintz (ed.), Public goods, environmental externalities and fiscal competition, chapter 0, pages 176-193, Springer.
    10. Shapley, Lloyd S. & Shubik, Martin, 1969. "On market games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 9-25, June.
    11. Huang, Chen-Ying & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2003. "Consistent solutions for cooperative games with externalities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 196-213, May.
    12. Asilis, Carlos M., 1995. "A note on the equivalence of time consistency and subgame perfection in stochastic games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 245-251, February.
    13. Chen-Ying Huang & Tomas Sjöström, 2010. "The Recursive Core for Non-Superadditive Games," Games, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 1(2), pages 1-23, April.
    14. R. M. Thrall & W. F. Lucas, 1963. "N‐person games in partition function form," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 281-298, March.
    15. Kyle Hyndman & Debraj Ray, 2007. "Coalition Formation with Binding Agreements," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 1125-1147.
    16. Yukihiko Funaki & Takehiko Yamato, 1999. "The core of an economy with a common pool resource: A partition function form approach," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(2), pages 157-171.
    17. Muthoo, Abhinay, 1990. "Bargaining without commitment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 291-297, September.
    18. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-491, June.
    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. Kóczy, LászlóÁ., 2015. "Stationary consistent equilibrium coalition structures constitute the recursive core," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 104-110.
    2. László Á. Kóczy, 2018. "Partition Function Form Games," Theory and Decision Library C, Springer, number 978-3-319-69841-0, December.
    3. Montero, M.P., 1999. "Coalition Formation in Games with Externalities," Discussion Paper 1999-121, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    4. László Kóczy, 2007. "A recursive core for partition function form games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 41-51, August.
    5. Ray, Debraj & Vohra, Rajiv, 2015. "Coalition Formation," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    6. Laszlo A. Koczy, 2019. "The risk-based core for cooperative games with uncertainty," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1906, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    7. Okada, Akira, 2010. "The Nash bargaining solution in general n-person cooperative games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2356-2379, November.
    8. Akira Okada, 2015. "Cooperation and Institution in Games," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 66(1), pages 1-32, March.
    9. Roy Chowdhury, Prabal & Sengupta, Kunal, 2012. "Transparency, complementarity and holdout," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 598-612.
    10. Chen-Ying Huang & Tomas Sjöström, 2010. "The Recursive Core for Non-Superadditive Games," Games, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 1(2), pages 1-23, April.
    11. Dominik Karos, 2015. "Stable partitions for games with non-transferable utilities and externalities," Economics Series Working Papers 741, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    12. Huang, Chen-Ying & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2006. "Implementation of the recursive core for partition function form games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 771-793, September.
    13. Kóczy, László Á., 2009. "Sequential coalition formation and the core in the presence of externalities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 559-565, May.
    14. Licun Xue & Lingling Zhang, 2012. "Bidding and sequential coalition formation with externalities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(1), pages 49-73, February.
    15. Debraj Ray & Rajiv Vohra, 2013. "Coalition Formation," Working Papers 2013-1, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    16. Herings, P.J.J. & Houba, H, 2015. "Costless delay in negotiations," Research Memorandum 002, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    17. Prabal Roy Chowdhury & Kunal Sengupta, 2008. "Multi-person bargaining with complementarity: Is there holdout?," Indian Statistical Institute, Planning Unit, New Delhi Discussion Papers 08-10, Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi, India.
    18. Parkash Chander, 0. "Stability of the merger-to-monopoly and a core concept for partition function games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 0, pages 1-21.
    19. Parkash Chander, 2020. "Stability of the merger-to-monopoly and a core concept for partition function games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(4), pages 953-973, December.
    20. Kóczy, L.Á., 2008. "Stationary quasi-perfect equilibrium partitions constitute the recursive core," Research Memorandum 028, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social choice theory; apportionment; electoral law; Venice Commission; one man-one vote; Alabama paradox; population paradox; Hare quota JEL Codes: D72; D78; D62;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities

    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:pkk:wpaper:1204. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gkbmfhu.html .

    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: Alexandra Vécsey The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Alexandra Vécsey to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gkbmfhu.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.