From ERS (UK) website (summer 2023)
Some electoral systems are good at making the numbers of MPs for each party be in proportion to the votes cast, (see PR below),
and some give voters more choice over whom is elected (see Voter Choice below).
As well the prercentage of effective votes and information on voters' sentiment is also greater under PR than under a non-PR election system, as is explained below.
Proportional representation ... A more proportional way would mean that a party that received one-third of the vote could expect one-third of the seats in parliament.
Ways of electing MPs like Party List Proportional Representation, the Single Transferable Vote and the Additional Member System, have been designed with the aim of being more proportional ...Within the more proportional systems, there are different ways of electing MPs.
With some, you only vote for a party, (some forms of party list PR);
with others, you vote directly for candidates (STV*)
Saying that only under STV can you vote directly for a candidate overlooks open list PR. Open list PR is where a voter can vote for individual candidate or candidates in addition to indicating preference for a party, as we see next.
Party list PR can be: - closed-list PR -- the order of names on the party list determines who gets seats
- open list PR - voters indicate preference for candidates, and perhaps also indicate party or parties preference.
A common version of OLPR works this way - A vote for a candidate is counted as a vote for that party when officials determine how many seats each party receives and how many seats each party should receive. This means it is possible for a vote for a candidate to help a candidate a voter dislikes, if that candidate is popular with the supporters of the rest of their party.
In some countries, you can just vote for a party and leave the ordering of the candidates up to the other voters who indicate their preference for individual candidates.
- semi-open list -- voter has choice of voting for a party list or candidate. The most popular of the candidates among the party list are elected. The party list allocates the seats if enough voters did not mark a preference for someone else on the party list.
A vote for a candidate is counted as a vote for their party when it is decided how many seats each party should receive. This means it is possible for a vote for a candidate to help a candidate a voter dislikes, if that candidate is popular with the supporters of the rest of their party.
In some countries, you can just vote for a party and leave the ordering of the candidates up to the other voters.
Single Transferable Voting (STV)
Another form of PR is STV.
Like any form of PR, multiple members are elected in each contest. Each voter has one vote. They may mark back-up preferences to help ensure that their vote is used.
PR is achieved in the multi-member district or across the board if an at-large contest is used.
By using districts, local representation is achieved. it is also achieved in at-large elections due to the ability of every substantial voting block, whether concentrated in one area or dispersed, to elect at least one member. STV systems are often distinguished by the way that surplus votes are transferred:
Three main types of STV - random -- all votes that arrive to a candidate after he or she obtains quota are
re-routed, or surplus votes received by the candidate are transferred at random.
- Hare system (AKA whole vote system) -- next usable marked preference is used to set transfer of surplus votes, either based on last parcel received or based on all the votes held by successful candidate.
- Gregory or other fractional method -- all marked preferences are used to determine the transfers.
Constituency link
... In some List PR systems, you vote for a party and elect a group of MPs to represent a large part of the country, like the whole North West. This means that they can’t be held individually accountable, and may may all live in the same major town.
Likewise, in First Past the Post, MPs can be elected with minority support. So whilst they represent a small geographical area, the majority of their constituents might not want them to represent them.
STV, on the other hand, has a strong constituency link as MPs still represent a relatively small area (if districts are used), whilst each voter is likely to have an MP for whom they have voted for, or at least someone elected in the contest represents the views of the voter.
Voter Choice
Different voting systems give voters more or less choice over which candidates get elected.
At the lowest level some non-democratic countries will often run "elections" with just one candidate.
In democratic countries, voter choice often means the voter may choose the preferred individual candidate or simply may vote for the preferred choice of party. Semi-open PR gives voter choice of the two. (see below)
With Closed List List PR, voters vote for a list of candidates chosen by their preferred party, only the top ones of which will be elected in most cases.
With systems where there is just one MP per constituency, like First Past the Post and the Alternative Vote, each party chooses just one candidate to stand. In both cases, voters who would like a party to form the government, but dislike their local candidate have no way of expressing that opinion.
Open List List PR and STV allow voters to vote among a wide selection of candidates of many different parties. They even have to choose between candidates of the same party. This creates a high level of voter choice.
In any list PR system, votes are not transferable so if the candidate marked as the preference is not elected, or if no seats are allocated to the preferred party list, the vote will not be used to elect anyone.
In STV, due to the vote transfer, a large proportion of votes are used to actually elect someone. The vote is sometimes not used to elect the voter's first preference, but it will in all cases be used to elect a candidate of the voter's choice or not be used at all.
The party label, the party list and party slate play no role in the election process in STV. But voter may mark their first preference and all back-up preferences for candidates of just one party. then the vote will be used to elect someone of that party or not be used at all - an outcome very similar to closed-list list PR.
Semi-open list PR operates like a closed-list PR in some ways and like an open-list PR in others.
The voter has liberty to choose an individual candidate but doesn't have to.
The voter has liberty to choose a party list but doesn't have to.
There is wide selection of candidates, even candidates of the same party, offered to the voter.
List PR systems generally use larger districts than STV, so the constituency link is weaker than in STV and FPTP.
===================================================
in Canada historically, in provincial and federal elections
we have used
non-proportional systems - FPTP, Block Voting and Alternative Voting (IRV)
semi-proportional system - Limited Voting
proportional system - STV is the only PR system used in the history of Canada.
used in Alberta and Manitoba to elect some MLAs from 1920s to 1950s
List PR is thought by some to be against the British tradition whereby voters vote directly for candidates. But in FPTP and AV, which together have been used to elect most of the members of our legislative chambers, voters have no choice of candidates of the same party so it is difficult to tell if they vote based on party label or due to preference for an individual candidate.
Block Voting offers selection of candidates of the same party but each voter has enough votes to vote for all the candidates of the party, and it seems mostly do spread their votes just on one party. But due to each voter casting multiple votes, it is unclear how voters support those who are elected.
Other aspects to consider when choosing election system
aside from proportionality, consituency link and voter choice, two other aspects might influence choice of election system.
They are percentage of effective votes and information on voters' sentiment.
Percentage of effective votes
The percentage of effective votes under FPTP varies from quite high to quite low. As few as 18 percent of the votes may be used to elect the winner, or as much as 82 percent.
In list PR and STV, the percentage of effective votes ranges from about 80 percent to 95 percent. This is true whether the election is held as an at-large contest or if districts divide the electorate.
With almost all votes being used, oftgen adopton of list or STV produces a high vote turnout compared to non-proportional system such as FPTP.
The effect of high turn out and a high rate of effective votes means that
in Edmonton city election using STV in 1923, about 12,000 voted and 12,000 valid votes were cast. Quota was about 1700, and about 10,000 of the votes cast were used to elect the six winners.
in the previous election just one year earlier, under Block Voting six had been elected by 11,000 voters. About 60,000 votes were cast (due to the Block Voting system used) and a total of 30,000 votes (about half of those cast) were used to elect someone.
and even where voter turnout does not increase after adoption of STV, the number of effective votes is still larger than under previous non-PR method.
Cleveland City council
1923 under STV 106,000 votes were cast for council. 86,000 were used to elect winners.
In previous election (1921), 154,000 voters voted. 130,000 valid votes were cast for alderrmanic (each member elected in a separate district) and only 60,000 votes were used to elect someone.
Cincinnati City council
1925 under STV 120,000 valid votes were cast for council. 108,000 were used to elect winners.
In previous election (1921), 129,000 valid votes were cast to elect 26 members in single-member wards, 69,000 were used to elect someone.
(figures for Cleveland and Cincinnati elections provided in the 1926 book Proportional Representation by Hoag and Hallett, p. 145)
Hoag and Hallet observed "Many who vote conscientiously under any system of election do so under PR with a new enthusiasm, because of the new assurance it gives them of gertting results."
Information on voters' sentiment
Single voting, as in FPTP, STV and list PR, allows more information on voting behaviour of voters. STV shows most info of all as voter shows their first preference and their lesser choices in order of preference. Even if a number of votes are used to elect Candidate A of Party A, analysis of the ballots shows what those voters' next choice is, so their sentiment regarding a secondary issue might become clear, allowing parties to better assess their policy stance.
========================================================
Here's a categorization of common election systems:
number of winners in a contest-- single winner (single office at-large such as mayor, or chamber filled by single winner contests in districts dividing electorate. System used is usually one of FPTP, TRS, instant-runoff voting. multiple winners (block voting, STV, limited voting) Type of electoral method -- direct elections indirect (by legislature(s) and/or electoral college), Election systems usually fit one of these general categories: majoritarian/plurality (body elected in winner-take-all districts e.g. FPTP, TRS, block voting), majoritarian (Instant-runoff voting, TRS), proportional (body elected by STV or party-list PR), semi-proportional (e.g. SNTV, LV). Mixed systems use two or more of these methods, and produce a chamber where different members are elected through two or more different election methods. (Mixed Member Proportional elects members through both first past the post and proportional.) Parallel voting systems, such as used in Egypt, are examples of mixed systems. Seats per district or contest
Some elections are held to fill all the seats in the chamber (Netherlands, Israel). Most elections are split into a number of electoral districts where all the members are elected at one time. In some elections, there is one person elected per district. In others, there are many people elected per district (sometimes all districts have same number of seats; other systems use districts with varying number of seats.) (Proportional representation and STV depends on use of a contest that fills multiple seats at one time.) Electoral districts can have different names, see list of electoral districts by nation.Some election systems see half or a third of the members elected at one time (staggered terms).
Election systems can use one or more layers. First past the post elections use just one layer.
MMP (an example of a mixed system listed above) uses both district elections and overall pooling of votes, usually where voters cast both a district vote and a party vote. In Demark's mixed member system, a single vote is used both for election of the district member and of an at-large party seat.
Some city election systems, such as City of Thunder Bay (Canada)*, Seattle (U.S.)* and Nelson (New Zealand), use both ward elections and at-large district to elect members of city council.
At-large contests elect multiple members so make either list, PR, STV or block voting possible.
As well, multi-member wards, such as used in Nelson, make either list PR, STV or block voting possible. Single-winner ward contests usually use the first past the post, instant-runoff voting or the two-round system.[1]
often choice put to city voters is to choose between FPTP ward contests and at-large block voting.STV (or SNTV or CV) are not usually presented as an option. List PR is often not possible because party labels are not used.
STV (or SNTV or CV) in an at-large contest would give some benefits of at-large block voting (such as wide offering of candidates to the voter) without the wasted votes and disproportional results of block voting. (Just the voter would have to choose a single candidate for whom to give first preference (or his or her only vote), while in block voting, voter can vote for several candidates without distinction.)
Total number of seats
the number of representatives elected to the body in total. (general rule is number of members in the lower house is the cube root of the total population.)[1]
Electoral threshold
Many list PR systems and MMP systems impose an electoral threshold below which a party does not get seats.
When electoral thresholds are used, 3 to 5 percent are common.
A go-around is allowed under many MMP systems where a party that gets a district seat is allowed to get its proportional due share of seats even if the party's vote share is below the electoral threshold.
Although the electoral threshold seems valuable as a way to bar "extreme" parties from taking seats, its impact can be major and its effect may create its own problems:
- in some elections as much as 20 percent of voters are unrepresented due to voting for parties whose vote share is not above the threshold (Estonia circa 2018)
- the parties denied representation are not balanced left or right and thus a side that does not have popular support may take government due to parties on the other side being barred from representation (Israel, 2021).
Type of vote used First past the post uses single X voting. Block voting uses multiple X voting, same as number of seats to fill. STV and Instant-runoff voting use ranked votes. List PR uses X voting. Limited voting uses multiple X voting, not as many as number of seats to fill.
The type of voting used is presented here as a way to distinguish electoral systems but this essay is not meant to be examination of all the different aspects of electoral systems but is intended to illuminate ways to categorize/organize the various election systems.
(Elections are composed of five different matters divided into three subjects:
Voting matters
- votes as voter casts it
- vote transfers under STV or Instant-runoff Voting
Method of electing:
- District results
- top-up/levelling seats if used, as in MMP
Body elected:
- composition of the chamber elected.
This essay is meant to look at the method of electing.
Above, we see that all in all, a somewhat bewildering and overlapping collection of terms are used to describe election systems! ===================================== *The Seattle City Council is the legislative body of the city of Seattle, Washington. The Council consists of nine members serving four-year terms, seven of which are elected by electoral districts and two of which are elected in citywide at-large positions through the seat/post system (apparently each seat is filled through separate FPTP contest). *The City of Thunder Bay uses a combination system -- five members of its Council are elected at-large (apparently through block voting) and seven in single-member wards
(note: 26 candidates sought the five at-large seats in 2018).
This configuration has been used ever since the City was created through an amalgamation in 1970.
==============
Canadian practice concerning At-Large city elections [as of 2012?]
While permitted under the Municipal Act, 2001, s. 217 (1) (4), a general vote (at-large) system is not the practice in any municipality in Ontario with a population greater than 100,000.
At-large elections are most often found in smaller, rural municipalities that do not have significant geographic differences within the municipality.
The largest municipality in Ontario with an at-large system is Niagara Falls (population 85,000).
Vancouver (population 610,000), which has a party system, is the largest city in Canada with an at-large system. It has had have had periodic discussions about switching to a ward system.
Municipalities can choose to combine at-large and ward systems, but this is relatively rare.
Among single-tier Ontario municipalities in the 100,000 to 200,000 population range, only the City of Thunder Bay uses a combination system -- five members of its Council are elected at-large and seven in wards. (see above)
(from https://guelph.ca/wp-content/uploads/Ward-councillors-or-councillors-at-large.pdf (accessed Oct 2023)
====================================
Electoral systems can be distinguished using these characteristics:
(only the most common systems are mentioned here)
Number of winners in a contest -- whether single or multiple (more than one)
single winner (single office at-large such as mayor, or chamber filled by single winner contests in districts dividing electorate. System used is usually one of FPTP, TRS, instant-runoff voting.
multiple winners (block voting, STV, Limited Voting)
Type of electoral method --
whether direct or indirect or no election at all
Direct elections
Indirect (by legislature(s) and/or electoral college),
no election (chosen by a single person, or other rules e.g. hereditary)
Winning formula used
majoritarian/plurality (body elected in winner-take-all districts e.g. FPTP, TRS, block voting),
majoritarian (Instant-runoff voting, TRS),
proportional (body elected by STV or party-list PR),
semi-proportional (e.g. SNTV, LV).
Mixed systems use two or more of these methods, and produce chamber where different members are elected through two or more different election methods. (Mixed Member Proportional elects members through both first past the post and proportional.) Parallel voting systems, such as used in Egypt, are examples of mixed systems.
Seats per district or contest
A contest fills all the seats in the chamber (Netherlands, Israel).
Most times the electorate is split into a number of electoral districts where all the members in the district are elected at one time.
Sometimes a district has multiple members with the members being elected to staggered terms
Where districts are used:
In some elections, there is one person elected per district.
In others, there are many people elected per district.
(sometimes all districts have same number of seats;
other systems use districts with varying number of seats.
(Proportional representation and STV depends on use of a contest that fills multiple seats at one time.)
Electoral districts can have different names.
Some election systems see only half or a third of the members elected at one time (staggered terms).
Election systems can use one or more layers
First past the post elections use just one layer.
MMP (an example of a mixed system listed above) uses both district elections and overall pooling of votes, usually where voters cast both a district vote and a party vote.
In Demark's mixed member system, a single vote is used both for election of the district member and of an at-large party seat.
Some city election systems, such as City of Thunder Bay (Canada) and Nelson (New Zealand), use both ward elections and at-large district to elect members of city council.
At-large contests elect multiple members so make either list, PR, STV or block voting possible.
As well, multi-member wards, such as used in Nelson, make either list PR, STV or block voting possible. Single-winner ward contests usually use the first past the post, instant-runoff voting or the two-round system.
Total number of seats
the number of representatives elected to the body in total sets the maximum that can be elected in any one contest.
(General rule is number of members in the lower house is the cube root of the total population.)
Electoral threshold
some systems use them, (usually about 3.25 percent or 5 percent. Many systems that use them allow go-around such as election of one member prior to top-up);
some don't use electoral thresholds at all.
Type of vote used and number each voter can cast
First past the post uses single X voting.
Block voting uses multiple X voting, same as number of seats to fill.
STV and Instant-runoff voting use ranked votes.
List PR uses X voting.
Limited Voting uses multiple X voting, but each voter must cast fewer votes than the number of seats to fill.
======================
Comments