IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/79554.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Az Imperiali és Macau politikai választókörzet-kiosztási módszerek empirikus vizsgálata
[Empirical Analysis of the Imperiali and Macau Apportionment Methods]

Author

Listed:
  • Bittó, Virág

Abstract

Dolgozatomban bemutatom az Imperiali és Macau körzetkiosztási módszereket és megvizsgálom, hogy egy alapvető arányossági kritériumnak, az ún. Hare-kvóta tulajdonságnak mennyire felelnek meg. Emellett arra a kérdésre keresem a választ, hogy a két módszer valóban kedvez-e a vidéki megyéknek, azaz több körzetet osztanak-e ki kis megyéknek, mint amennyi a Hare-kvóta szerinti illetné őket. Ismertetem a körzetkiosztás alapvető tulajdonságait, illetve – mivel az Imperiali és a Macau módszer a jól ismert Jefferson/D’Hondt körzetkiosztási módszerek némileg módosított, átalakított változatai –, egy rövid történeti áttekintés keretében ez utóbbiakat is bemutatom. Az elemzés módszertanát részben a körzetkiosztási probléma matematikai eszköztára adja: az eljárásokat ház-monotonitás, népesség-monotonitás, illetve a kvóta tulajdonság alapján elemzem; emellett a módszertan másik részét a saját szerkesztésű, C++ nyelven írt számítógépes program képezi, amely adott népességi adatok és parlament-méretek esetén meghatározza az Imperiali és Macau módszerek szerinti körzetkiosztásokat.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:79554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/79554/1/MPRA_paper_79554.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gallagher, Michael, 1992. "Comparing Proportional Representation Electoral Systems: Quotas, Thresholds, Paradoxes and Majorities," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(4), pages 469-496, October.
    2. Kóczy Á., László & Biró, Péter & Sziklai, Balázs, 2012. "Választókörzetek igazságosan? [Fair apportionment of voting districts in Hungary]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1165-1186.
    3. 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.
    4. Biró, Péter & Kóczy, László Á. & Sziklai, Balázs, 2015. "Fair apportionment in the view of the Venice Commission’s recommendation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 32-41.
    5. Grigorii V. Golosov, 2014. "Authoritarian Electoral Engineering and its Limits: A Curious Case of the Imperiali Highest Averages Method in Russia," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(10), pages 1611-1628, November.
    6. M. L. Balinski & H. P. Young, 1979. "Criteria for Proportional Representation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 80-95, February.
    7. M. L. Balinski & H. P. Young, 1979. "Quotatone Apportionment Methods," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(1), pages 31-38, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2010. "Strategic Redistricting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1616-1641, September.
    10. Balinski, M. L. & Young, H. P., 1978. "Stability, Coalitions and Schisms in Proportional Representation Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 848-858, September.
    11. M. L. Balinski & H. P. Young, 1983. "Apportioning the United States House of Representatives," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 35-43, August.
    12. 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.
    13. John N. Friedman & Richard T. Holden, 2008. "Optimal Gerrymandering: Sometimes Pack, but Never Crack," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 113-144, March.
    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. Laszlo A. Koczy & Balazs Sziklai, 2018. "Bounds on Malapportionment," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1801, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    2. Csóka, Péter & Kondor, Gábor, 2019. "Delegációk igazságos kiválasztása társadalmi választások elméletével [Choosing a fair delegation by social choice theory]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 771-787.
    3. 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.
    4. Biró, Péter & Kóczy, László Á. & Sziklai, Balázs, 2015. "Fair apportionment in the view of the Venice Commission’s recommendation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 32-41.
    5. Balázs R Sziklai & Károly Héberger, 2020. "Apportionment and districting by Sum of Ranking Differences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, March.
    6. José Gutiérrez, 2015. "Majorization comparison of closed list electoral systems through a matrix theorem," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 807-814, December.
    7. John N. Friedman & Richard Holden, 2020. "Optimal Gerrymandering in a competitive environment," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 347-367, October.
    8. Clemens Puppe & Attila Tasnádi, 2015. "Axiomatic districting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 31-50, January.
    9. Kóczy Á., László & Biró, Péter & Sziklai, Balázs, 2012. "Választókörzetek igazságosan? [Fair apportionment of voting districts in Hungary]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1165-1186.
    10. Hideo Konishi & Chen‐Yu Pan, 2020. "Partisan and bipartisan gerrymandering," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(5), pages 1183-1212, September.
    11. repec:lan:wpaper:1932 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Katarzyna Cegiełka & Janusz Łyko & Radosław Rudek, 2019. "Beyond the Cambridge Compromise algorithm towards degressively proportional allocations," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 317-332, June.
    13. repec:lan:wpaper:1815 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Kai Hao Yang & Alexander K. Zentefis, 2022. "Gerrymandering and the Limits of Representative Democracy," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2328, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    15. Justin Svec & James Hamilton, 2015. "Endogenous voting weights for elected representatives and redistricting," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 434-441, December.
    16. Andrei Gomberg & Romans Pancs & Tridib Sharma, 2024. "Padding and pruning: gerrymandering under turnout heterogeneity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(2), pages 401-415, September.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Tom Van Puyenbroeck, 2008. "Proportional Representation, Gini Coefficients, and the Principle of Transfers," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 498-526, October.
    20. Jones, Michael A. & Wilson, Jennifer M., 2010. "Evaluation of thresholds for power mean-based and other divisor methods of apportionment," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 343-348, May.
    21. SunAh An & Michael Anderson & Cary Deck, 2023. "Gerrymandering in the laboratory," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 90(1), pages 182-213, July.
    22. de Mouzon, Olivier & Laurent, Thibault & Le Breton, Michel, 2020. "One Man, One Vote Part 2: Measurement of Malapportionment and Disproportionality and the Lorenz Curve," TSE Working Papers 20-1089, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    apportionment; Macau method; Imperiali method; divisor methods;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation

    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:pra:mprapa:79554. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.