Proportional representation: Difference between revisions
Added some information of failures
(→Notes) |
Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) (Added some information of failures) |
||
Line 18:
:<math>\mathrm{SLI} = \sum {(S-V)^2 \over V}</math>
The failing of all such measures is the assumption that each vote is cast for one political party. This means that the only system which can be used is a [[Partisan system]]. Under the assumption that
The reliance of the standard definition of Proportional representation on the system being [[Partisan system | Partisan]] is clearly limiting on the usefulness of such a definition. A [[Partisan system]] itself has long been considered a flaw which undermines the [[Ideal Representation]] of the individual. <ref>See {{Cite book |last=Mill |first=John Stuart |author-link=John Stuart Mill|year=1861 |editor-last= |editor-first= |contribution= |title= Considerations on Representative Government |edition=1 |publisher= Parker, Son, & Bourn |publication-date=1861 |location=London |url=https://archive.org/details/considerationso04millgoog |accessdate=20 June 2014 }} via Google Books</ref><ref>See {{Cite book |last=Mill |first=John Stuart |author-link=John Stuart Mill|year=1873 |editor-last= |editor-first= |contribution= |title= Considerations on Representative Government |edition=1 |publisher= Henry Holt & Company |publication-date=1873 |location=New York |url=https://archive.org/details/considerations00mill |accessdate=20 June 2014 }} via archive.org</ref> If Proportional Representation cannot be robustly defined in a non-partisan system then it is of little use.
== Proportional Representation Criteria==
Since the standard definitions of Proportional Representation do not apply to nearly all modern systems it has become common to define proportional representation in terms of passing some sort of criteria. There is no consensus on which criteria need to be passed for a parliament to be said to be proportional, though most can agree that a voting method that passes one of the [[weak forms of PSC]] (several of which are listed here) is at least semi-proportional. It is worth noting that because there are disagreements on how best to conceptualize of PR, some measures look at how much each voter likes their favorite candidate i.e. the one meant to "represent them" (such as [[Monroe's method]]) while others look at how satisfied each voter is with all of the elected representatives.
=== [[Proportionality for Solid Coalitions]] Criterion ===
Line 72:
A "semi-proportional" system is made of several [[Regional Systems | regional]] [[Multi-Member Districts]] with each passing some measure of [[Proportional Representation]]. While each district is in itself going to produce results with High Proportional Representation, the assembly as a whole will not. For larger parties, the results will tend to be fairly high in proportional representation because the variation from each district is averaged out over the group. For smaller parties, there is a threshold for entry so they may receive no seats. This is normally viewed as a positive feature since partisan systems often impose such a threshold to keep out small extremist groups.
Semi-Proportional systems can be constructed from any multi-winner system. However, they are typically done with sequential non-partisan systems, such as the [[single transferable vote]] and [[Reweighted score voting]]. The most common criticism of such systems have to do with inequalities that arise from the difference in population densities. Having a 5 member district in a sparsely populated rural area would imply that the district be much larger than similar districts in cities. To avoid this it is sometimes proposed that rural areas have single member district while cities have multi-member districts. This then results in another inequality relating to the partisan allocation of funds do to some seats being simpler to win with different systems. A good example of such failures which ultimately resulted in returning to the original system is provincial Canada.<ref>https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/manitoba-single-transferable-vote-1.5271771</ref>
An alternative,
==Advocacy==
Line 189:
* [[Proportionate Representation]]
* [[Ideal Representation]]
* [[Justified representation]]
* [[Types of representation]]
Line 198 ⟶ 199:
** [http://web.archive.org/web/20161228205929/https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/prlib.htm Mount Holyoke College]
== References ==
[[Category:Voting theory]]
{{fromwikipedia}}
| |||