IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v7y2024i1d10.1007_s42001-024-00249-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of sequential ranked-choice voting and single transferable vote

Author

Listed:
  • David McCune

    (William Jewell College)

  • Erin Martin

    (Brigham Young University)

  • Grant Latina

    (William Jewell College)

  • Kaitlyn Simms

    (William Jewell College)

Abstract

The methods of single transferable vote (STV) and sequential ranked-choice voting (RCV) are different methods for electing a set of winners in multiwinner elections. STV is a classical voting method that has been widely used internationally for many years. By contrast, sequential RCV has rarely been used, and only recently has seen an increase in usage as several cities in Utah have adopted the method to elect city council members. We use Monte Carlo simulations and a large database of real-world ranked-choice elections to investigate the behavior of sequential RCV by comparing it to STV. Our general finding is that sequential RCV often produces different winner sets than STV. Furthermore, sequential RCV is best understood as a majoritarian method which will not produce proportional results, often at the expense of minority interests.

Suggested Citation

  • David McCune & Erin Martin & Grant Latina & Kaitlyn Simms, 2024. "A comparison of sequential ranked-choice voting and single transferable vote," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 643-670, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:7:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-024-00249-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-024-00249-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-024-00249-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42001-024-00249-8?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.

    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:spr:jcsosc:v:7:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-024-00249-8. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.