IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2410.23869.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

New Combinatorial Insights for Monotone Apportionment

Author

Listed:
  • Javier Cembrano
  • Jos'e Correa
  • Ulrike Schmidt-Kraepelin
  • Alexandros Tsigonias-Dimitriadis
  • Victor Verdugo

Abstract

The apportionment problem constitutes a fundamental problem in democratic societies: How to distribute a fixed number of seats among a set of states in proportion to the states' populations? This--seemingly simple--task has led to a rich literature and has become well known in the context of the US House of Representatives. In this paper, we connect the design of monotone apportionment methods to classic problems from discrete geometry and combinatorial optimization and explore the extent to which randomization can enhance proportionality. We first focus on the well-studied family of stationary divisor methods, which satisfy the strong population monotonicity property, and show that this family produces only a slightly superlinear number of different outputs as a function of the number of states. While our upper and lower bounds leave a small gap, we show that--surprisingly--closing this gap would solve a long-standing open problem from discrete geometry, known as the complexity of $k$-levels in line arrangements. The main downside of divisor methods is their violation of the quota axiom, i.e., every state should receive $\lfloor q_i\rfloor$ or $\lceil q_i\rceil$ seats, where $q_i$ is the proportional share of the state. As we show that randomizing over divisor methods can only partially overcome this issue, we propose a relaxed version of divisor methods in which the total number of seats may slightly deviate from the house size. By randomizing over them, we can simultaneously satisfy population monotonicity, quota, and ex-ante proportionality. Finally, we turn our attention to quota-compliant methods that are house-monotone, i.e., no state may lose a seat when the house size is increased. We provide a polyhedral characterization based on network flows, which implies a simple description of all ex-ante proportional randomized methods that are house-monotone and quota-compliant.

Suggested Citation

  • Javier Cembrano & Jos'e Correa & Ulrike Schmidt-Kraepelin & Alexandros Tsigonias-Dimitriadis & Victor Verdugo, 2024. "New Combinatorial Insights for Monotone Apportionment," Papers 2410.23869, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2410.23869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2410.23869
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. L. Balinski & H. P. Young, 1979. "Quotatone Apportionment Methods," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(1), pages 31-38, February.
    2. M. L. Balinski & G. Demange, 1989. "An Axiomatic Approach to Proportionality Between Matrices," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 700-719, November.
    3. Friedrich Pukelsheim & Albert W. Marshall & Ingram Olkin, 2002. "A majorization comparison of apportionment methods in proportional representation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(4), pages 885-900.
    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. Bittó, Virág, 2017. "Az Imperiali és Macau politikai választókörzet-kiosztási módszerek empirikus vizsgálata [Empirical Analysis of the Imperiali and Macau Apportionment Methods]," MPRA Paper 79554, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Luc Lauwers & Tom Van Puyenbroeck, 2006. "The Hamilton Apportionment Method Is Between the Adams Method and the Jefferson Method," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 390-397, May.
    3. Gabrielle Demange, 2018. "New electoral systems and old referendums," PSE Working Papers hal-01852206, HAL.
    4. Demange, Gabrielle, 2012. "On party-proportional representation under district distortions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 181-191.
    5. Oelbermann, Kai-Friederike, 2016. "Alternate Scaling algorithm for biproportional divisor methods," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 25-32.
    6. Gabrielle Demange, 2021. "On the resolution of cross-liabilities," PSE Working Papers halshs-03151128, HAL.
    7. Gabrielle Demange, 2013. "On Allocating Seats To Parties And Districts: Apportionments," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-14.
    8. Michel Balinski, 2007. "Equitable representation and recruitment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 27-36, February.
    9. Laszlo A. Koczy & Peter Biro & Balazs Sziklai, 2017. "US vs. European Apportionment Practices: The Conflict between Monotonicity and Proportionality," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1716, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    10. Paolo Serafini, 2015. "Certificates of optimality for minimum norm biproportional apportionments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 1-12, January.
    11. Demange, Gabrielle, 2017. "Mutual rankings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 35-42.
    12. Grimmett, G.R. & Oelbermann, K.-F. & Pukelsheim, F., 2012. "A power-weighted variant of the EU27 Cambridge Compromise," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 136-140.
    13. Laszlo A. Koczy & Balazs Sziklai, 2018. "Bounds on Malapportionment," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1801, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    14. Moulin, Hervé, 2016. "Entropy, desegregation, and proportional rationing," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1-20.
    15. Steven J Brams & D Marc Kilgour, 2012. "Narrowing the field in elections: The Next-Two rule," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 24(4), pages 507-525, October.
    16. Brams,S.L. & Kaplan,T.R., 2002. "Dividing the indivisible : procedures for allocating cabinet ministries to political parties in a parliamentary system," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 340, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    17. Paul Gölz & Dominik Peters & Ariel Procaccia, 2022. "In This Apportionment Lottery, the House Always Wins," Post-Print hal-03834513, HAL.
    18. Marjorie B. Gassner, 1991. "Biproportional Delegations," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 321-342, July.
    19. Ulrich Kohler & Janina Zeh, 2012. "Apportionment methods," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 12(3), pages 375-392, September.
    20. Michel L. Balinski & Gabrielle Demange, 1989. "Algorithm for Proportional Matrices in Reals and Integers," Post-Print halshs-00585327, HAL.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2410.23869. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.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.