Parlamentswahlen nach dem doppelt-proportionalen Sitzzuteilungs- verfahren im Lichte der territorialen Repräsentation. Eine empirische Annäherung an ein konzeptionelles Dilemma

Sandro Lüscher
{"title":"Parlamentswahlen nach dem doppelt-proportionalen Sitzzuteilungs- verfahren im Lichte der territorialen Repräsentation. Eine empirische Annäherung an ein konzeptionelles Dilemma","authors":"Sandro Lüscher","doi":"10.5771/0340-1758-2023-3-571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The “doppelter Pukelsheim”, as the biproportional divisor method with standard rounding is colloquially called, enjoys great popularity in Switzerland . For good reason: the new method of distributing parliamentary seats among the parties better reflects the will of the voters than conventional PR-based methods . However, the formula, which was used for the first time in 2007 for the cantonal elections in Zurich, has a mathematical property that works against a fair representation of local electorates . Specifically, unequal participation rates and unequal proportions of eligible voters in the constituencies subtly lead to unequal influence of the individual constituencies on the overall result . On the basis of the Zurich municipal elections 2022 and the Graubünden cantonal elections 2022, I explain why this is problematic and then show how the representation of the constituency electorates could be optimized with a minimal intervention in the calculation formula . The evaluation shows that, in both cases, seat shifts between the parties occur . This can be explained to a large extent by the different mobilization of the constituency electorates and only to a lesser extent by the different proportions of eligible voters in the constituencies . Furthermore, initial evidence suggests that these seat shifts are not random but are related to the demographics of the party electorates .","PeriodicalId":486211,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/0340-1758-2023-3-571","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The “doppelter Pukelsheim”, as the biproportional divisor method with standard rounding is colloquially called, enjoys great popularity in Switzerland . For good reason: the new method of distributing parliamentary seats among the parties better reflects the will of the voters than conventional PR-based methods . However, the formula, which was used for the first time in 2007 for the cantonal elections in Zurich, has a mathematical property that works against a fair representation of local electorates . Specifically, unequal participation rates and unequal proportions of eligible voters in the constituencies subtly lead to unequal influence of the individual constituencies on the overall result . On the basis of the Zurich municipal elections 2022 and the Graubünden cantonal elections 2022, I explain why this is problematic and then show how the representation of the constituency electorates could be optimized with a minimal intervention in the calculation formula . The evaluation shows that, in both cases, seat shifts between the parties occur . This can be explained to a large extent by the different mobilization of the constituency electorates and only to a lesser extent by the different proportions of eligible voters in the constituencies . Furthermore, initial evidence suggests that these seat shifts are not random but are related to the demographics of the party electorates .
根据领土代表性的双重分配程序举行的议会选举。在概念困境上采取实证相似的方法
“doppelter Pukelsheim”,俗称标准四舍五入的双比例除法,在瑞士非常流行。理由很充分:在政党之间分配议会席位的新方法比传统的基于pr的方法更能反映选民的意愿。然而,该公式在2007年首次用于苏黎世的州选举,其数学性质不利于公平地代表地方选民。具体来说,不平等的参与率和选区中不平等的合格选民比例微妙地导致了个别选区对总体结果的不平等影响。在2022年苏黎世市政选举和2022年格劳比恩登州选举的基础上,我解释了为什么这是有问题的,然后展示了如何在对计算公式进行最小干预的情况下优化选区选民的代表。评价表明,在这两种情况下,座位调整当事人之间发生。这在很大程度上可以解释为选区选民动员的不同,在较小程度上只能解释为选区中合格选民的不同比例。此外,初步证据表明,这些席位的转移不是随机的,而是与政党选民的人口结构有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书