IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v121y2004i3p507-517.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The alternative vote and interethnic moderation: A reply to Fraenkel and Grofman

Author

Listed:
  • Donald Horowitz

Abstract

The alternative vote (AV) is a preferential electoral system that tends to reward political moderation and compromise. Fraenkel and Grofman have modeled the likely effects of AV in severely divided societies, in order to impugn AV as a tool of interethnic accommodation. In this response, I show that Fraenkel and Grofman’s model is based on extreme assumptions that bear no relation to party and voter behavior in such societies. Models based on realistic assumptions about strategic behavior and cross-national experience with AV both demonstrate that AV generally provides centripetal incentives that can contribute to interethnic coalition-building and accommodation. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Suggested Citation

  • Donald Horowitz, 2004. "The alternative vote and interethnic moderation: A reply to Fraenkel and Grofman," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 507-517, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:121:y:2004:i:3:p:507-517
    DOI: 10.1007/s11127-004-2488-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11127-004-2488-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11127-004-2488-y?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. Jon Fraenkel & Bernard Grofman, 2004. "A Neo-Downsian Model of the Alternative Vote as a Mechanism for Mitigating Ethnic Conflict in Plural Societies," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 487-506, February.
    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. Adedokun, Ayokunu, 2017. "Post-conflict peacebuilding: A critical survey of the literature and avenues for future research," MERIT Working Papers 2017-016, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Donald Horowitz, 2007. "Where have all the parties gone? Fraenkel and Grofman on the alternative vote – yet again," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 13-23, October.
    3. Todd Donovan & Caroline Tolbert & Samuel Harper, 2022. "Demographic differences in understanding and utilization of ranked choice voting," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(7), pages 1539-1550, December.
    4. Joseph Ornstein & Robert Norman, 2014. "Frequency of monotonicity failure under Instant Runoff Voting: estimates based on a spatial model of elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 1-9, October.
    5. Marcus Ogren, 2023. "Candidate Incentive Distributions: How voting methods shape electoral incentives," Papers 2306.07147, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    6. Nenad Stojanović & Matteo Bonotti, 2020. "Political Parties in Deeply Multilingual Polities: Institutional Conditions and Lessons for the EU," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 599-615, May.
    7. Jon Fraenkel & Bernard Grofman, 2007. "The merits of Neo-Downsian modeling of the alternative vote: A reply to Horowitz," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 1-11, October.

    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. Kiran Tomlinson & Johan Ugander & Jon Kleinberg, 2023. "The Moderating Effect of Instant Runoff Voting," Papers 2303.09734, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    2. Jon Fraenkel & Bernard Grofman, 2007. "The merits of Neo-Downsian modeling of the alternative vote: A reply to Horowitz," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 1-11, October.
    3. Donald Horowitz, 2007. "Where have all the parties gone? Fraenkel and Grofman on the alternative vote – yet again," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 13-23, October.
    4. Joseph Ornstein & Robert Norman, 2014. "Frequency of monotonicity failure under Instant Runoff Voting: estimates based on a spatial model of elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 1-9, October.

    More about this item

    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:kap:pubcho:v:121:y:2004:i:3:p:507-517. 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.