IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/cup/cbooks/9781107607996.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Electoral Systems and Political Context

Author

Listed:
  • Moser,Robert G.
  • Scheiner,Ethan

Abstract

Electoral Systems and Political Context illustrates how political and social context conditions the effects of electoral rules. The book examines electoral behavior and outcomes in countries that use 'mixed-member' electoral systems – where voters cast one ballot for a party list under proportional representation (PR) and one for a candidate in a single member district (SMD). Based on comparisons of outcomes under the two different rules used in mixed-member systems, the book highlights how electoral systems' effects – especially strategic voting, the number of parties and women's representation – tend to be different in new democracies from what one usually sees in established democracies. Moreover, electoral systems such as SMDs are usually presumed to constrain the number of parties irrespective of the level of social diversity, but this book demonstrates that social diversity frequently shapes party fragmentation even under such restrictive rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Moser,Robert G. & Scheiner,Ethan, 2012. "Electoral Systems and Political Context," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107607996, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:cbooks:9781107607996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel Stockemer & Manon Tremblay, 2015. "Federalism and Women’s Representation: Do Federations have more Women Legislators than Centralized States?," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 45(4), pages 605-625.
    2. Andrew Beath & Fotini Christia & Georgy Egorov & Ruben Enikolopov, 2016. "Electoral Rules and Political Selection: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment in Afghanistan," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(3), pages 932-968.
    3. Nwankwo Cletus Famous, 2019. "Religion and Voter Choice Homogeneity in the Nigerian Presidential Elections of the Fourth Republic," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, June.
    4. Doni Budi Setiyon & Yuwanto Nur Hidayat Sardini, 2023. "Split-Ticket Voting in Voter Behaviour of the Regional Election (Case Study of Governor Election and Deputy Governor of Central Kalimantan in 2016)," International Journal of Operations Management, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 3(1), pages 15-27, February.
    5. Wahman, Michael, 2015. "Nationalized Incumbents and Regional Challengers: Opposition- and Incumbent-Party Nationalization in Africa," GIGA Working Papers 270, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    6. Thushyanthan Baskaran & Mariana Lopes da Fonseca, 2016. "Electoral thresholds and political representation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 117-136, October.
    7. Jessica Fortin-Rittberger & Berthold Rittberger, 2014. "Do electoral rules matter? Explaining national differences in women's representation in the European Parliament," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 496-520, December.
    8. Kao, Kristen & Lust, Ellen & Rakner, Lise, 2022. "Vote-buying, anti-corruption campaigns, and identity in African elections," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    9. Andrew Beath & Fotini Christia & Georgy Egorov & Ruben Enikolopov, 2014. "Electoral Rules and the Quality of Politicians: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment in Afghanistan," NBER Working Papers 20082, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. John Carey & Simon Hix, 2013. "District magnitude and representation of the majority’s preferences: a comment and reinterpretation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 139-148, January.

    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:cup:cbooks:9781107607996. 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: Ruth Austin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org .

    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.