The Electoral Systems of 211 Independent ... - International IDEA

ANNEX A
The Electoral Systems of 211 Independent States and Related
Territories (1997)
Country
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
American Samoa (USA)
Andorra
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba (Netherlands)
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain 2
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burma 3
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Cape Verde Islands
Cayman Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Comoros Islands
Congo
Cook Islands (New Zeal.)
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Electoral
System 1997
FPTP
Parallel-TRS
List PR
;;;;
FPTP
Parallel-Block
;;;;
List PR
FPTP
List PR
;;;;
Parallel-FPTP
FPTP
AV
;;;;
List PR
Parallel-TRS
FPTP
FPTP-Block
FPTP
FPTP
TRS
List PR
FPTP
List PR
Block
FPTP
MMP
List PR
FPTP
List PR
nde
List PR
List PR
FPTP
List PR
List PR
;;;;
Parallel-FPTP
FPTP
List PR
FPTP
TRS
TRS
List PR
nde
List PR
TRS
TRS
FPTP
List PR
Parallel-FPTP
TRS
;;;;
List PR
Type
Plurality
Semi-PR
PR
Plurality
Semi-PR
PR
Plurality
PR
Semi-PR
Plurality
Majority
PR
Semi-PR
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
Majority
PR
Plurality
PR
Plurality
Plurality
PR
PR
Plurality
PR
–
PR
PR
Plurality
PR
PR
Semi-PR
Plurality
PR
Plurality
Majority
Majority
PR
–
PR
Majority
Majority
Plurality
PR
Semi-PR
Majority
PR
Parliamentary
Size 1
205
140
430
20
28
220
17
257
189
21
148
183
125
49
30
300
28
260
150
29
83
40
150
130
240
47
513
–
240
111
485
81
120
180
295
79
19
85
125
120
–
168
42
125
25
57
124
589
80
Key: FPTP=First Past the Post, BV=Block Vote, PB=Party Block, AV=Alternative Vote, TRS=Two-Round System,
SNTV=Single Non-Transferable Vote, List PR=List Proportional Representation, MMP=Mixed Member Proportional,
STV=Single Transferable Vote, nde=no direct elections.
NB: We make no comment on the state of democracy. Categorizations are based on the electoral law as of May 1997, or
the last competitive election held.
1 Directly elected members. 2 Bahrain´s last competitive elections were held in 1973. 3 Burma´s last competitive elections to the People´s Assembly,
which has not been allowed to sit as elected, were held in 1990.
139

Country
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fed. St. of Micronesia
Fiji
Finland
France
French Guiana (France)
French Polynesia (Fra.)
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guadeloupe (France)
Guam (USA)
Guatemala
Guernsey (UK)
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Isle of Man (UK)
Israel
Italy
Ivory Coast
Jamaica
Japan
Jersey (UK)
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Korea (North)
Korea (South)
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Electoral
System 1997
List PR
List PR
PB
FPTP
List PR
Parallel-PB
TRS
;;;;;
List PR
List PR
List PR
List PR
FPTP
FPTP
Block-FPTP
List PR
TRS
TRS
List PR
TRS
FPTP
Parallel-TRS
MMP
;;;;;
FPTP
List PR
FPTP
TRS
FPTP
Parallel-FPTP
;;;;;
FPTP
Parallel-FPTP
;;;;;
List PR
List PR
TRS
List PR
MMP
List PR
FPTP
List PR
TRS
TRS
STV
FPTP
List PR
MMP
FPTP-Block
FPTP
;;;;;
Parallel-FPTP
FPTP
SNTV
FPTP
FPTP
TRS
;;;;;
FPTP
Parallel-FPTP
Block
;;;;;
TRS
Type
PR
PR
Plurality
Plurality
PR
Semi-PR
Majority
PR
PR
PR
PR
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
PR
Majority
Majority
PR
Majority
Plurality
Semi-PR
PR
Plurality
PR
Plurality
Majority
Plurality
Semi-PR
Plurality
Semi-PR
PR
PR
Majority
PR
PR
PR
Plurality
PR
Majority
Majority
PR
Plurality
PR
PR
Plurality
Plurality
Semi-PR
Plurality
Semi-PR
Plurality
Plurality
Majority
Plurality
Semi-PR
Plurality
Majority
Parliamentary
Size
200
179
65
31
120
77
444
84
80
130
101
547
14
70
200
577
19
41
120
36
235
656
200
300
15
42
21
80
33
114
100
53
83
128
386
63
543
425
270
250
166
24
120
630
175
60
500
53
80
67
188
39
687
299
50
35
Key: FPTP=First Past the Post, BV=Block Vote, PB=Party Block, AV=Alternative Vote, TRS=Two-Round System,
SNTV=Single Non-Transferable Vote, List PR=List Proportional Representation, MMP=Mixed Member Proportional,
STV=Single Transferable Vote, nde=no direct elections.
140

Country
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Martinique (France)
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mayotte (France)
Mexico
Moldova
Monaco
Mongolia
Montserrat
Morocco
Mozambique
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
Neth. Antilles (Neth.)
New Caledonia (France)
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Niue (New Zealand)
North Mariana Isl. (USA)
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Palestinian Authority
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico (USA)
Qatar
Réunion (France)
Romania
Russia
Electoral
System 1997
Block
List PR
PB
FPTP
List PR
nde
List PR
;;;;;
Parallel-TRS
List PR
TRS
List PR
FPTP
FPTP
Block
TRS
STV
FPTP
TRS
TRS
Block
TRS-FPTP
MMP
TRS
TRS
FPTP
FPTP
FPTP
List PR
List PR
AV
FPTP
List PR
List PR
List PR
MMP
List PR
Parallel-FPTP
FPTP
;;;;;
FPTP-Block
FPTP
List PR
nde
FPTP
FPTP
Block
List PR
FPTP
List PR
List PR
Block
List PR
List PR
FPTP
nde
TRS
List PR
;;;;;
Parallel-FPTP
;;;;;
Type
Plurality
PR
Plurality
Plurality
PR
–
PR
Semi-PR
PR
Majority
PR
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
Majority
PR
Plurality
Majority
Majority
Plurality
Majority
PR
Majority
Majority
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
PR
PR
Majority
Plurality
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
Semi-PR
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
PR
–
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
PR
Plurality
PR
PR
Plurality
PR
PR
Plurality
–
Majority
PR
Semi-PR
Parliamentary
Size
85
100
128
65
64
–
25
141
60
120
138
177
192
40
147
65
33
45
79
70
17
500
104
18
76
7
222
250
72
18
205
150
27
54
120
92
83
593
20
18
165
–
217
30
88
72
109
80
120
204
460
230
53
–
44
328
450
Key: FPTP=First Past the Post, BV=Block Vote, PB=Party Block, AV=Alternative Vote, TRS=Two-Round System,
SNTV=Single Non-Transferable Vote, List PR=List Proportional Representation, MMP=Mixed Member Proportional,
STV=Single Transferable Vote, nde=no direct elections.
141

Country
Rwanda
San Marino
Sao Tomé and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia 4
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Pierre & Miquelon (Fra.)
St. Vincent & the Grenadines
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Turks and Caicos Islands
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States of America
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Venezuela
Vietnam
Virgin Islands (UK)
Virgin Islands (USA)
Wallis and Futuna (Fra.)
Western Samoa
Yemen
Yugoslavia
Zaire/Dem. Rep. of the Congo
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Electoral
System 1997
FPTP
List PR
List PR
nde
;;;;;
Parallel-PB
Parallel-FPTP
;;;;;
List PR
PB-FPTP
List PR
List PR
FPTP
Parallel-FPTP
List PR
;;;;;
List PR
List PR
FPTP
FPTP
TRS-FPTP
FPTP
FPTP
List PR
FPTP
List PR
List PR
FPTP
;;;;;
Parallel-SNTV
TRS
FPTP
Block
TRS
FPTP
FPTP
;;;;;
Parallel-PB
List PR
;;;;;
TRS
FPTP
FPTP
FPTP
TRS
nde
FPTP
FPTP
List PR
TRS
SNTV
MMP
TRS
FPTP
Block
List PR
FPTP-Block
FPTP
List PR
FPTP
FPTP
FPTP
Type
Plurality
PR
PR
–
Semi-PR
Semi-PR
PR
Plurality
PR
PR
Plurality
Semi-PR
PR
PR
PR
Plurality
Plurality
Majority
Plurality
Plurality
PR
Plurality
PR
PR
Plurality
Semi-PR
Majority
Plurality
Plurality
Majority
Plurality
Plurality
Semi-PR
PR
Majority
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
Majority
–
Plurality
Plurality
PR
Majority
Semi-PR
PR
Majority
Plurality
Plurality
PR
Plurality
Plurality
PR
Plurality
Plurality
Plurality
Parliamentary
Size
70
60
55
–
120
33
68
83
150
90
47
123
400
350
225
11
17
19
15
275
51
55
349
200
250
164
181
232
391
81
9
36
163
550
50
13
12
214
450
–
659
435
99
250
50
203
393
9
15
20
47
301
138
210
150
120
Key: FPTP=First Past the Post, BV=Block Vote, PB=Party Block, AV=Alternative Vote, TRS=Two-Round System,
SNTV=Single Non-Transferable Vote, List PR=List Proportional Representation, MMP=Mixed Member Proportional,
STV=Single Transferable Vote, nde=no direct elections.
4 Data based on Somalia´s last competitive elections, held in 1969
142

143

144

Glossary of Terms
ANNEX B
Additional Member System – Another term for a Mixed Member Proportional system.
Alternative Vote (AV) – A preferential, plurality-majority system used in single-member
districts in which voters use numbers to mark their preferences on the ballot paper.
A candidate who receives over 50% of first-preferences is declared elected. If no
candidate achieves an absolute majority of first-preferences, votes are re-allocated
until one candidate has an absolute majority of votes cast.
Apparentement – A device used in some List Proportional Representation systems which
enables separate parties to declare themselves linked for the purpose of seat allocation.
Ballot structure – The way in which electoral choices are presented on the ballot
paper. Ballots can be either ordinal or categorical.
Bi-cameral Parliament – A legislature comprised of two houses, usually known as an
upper house and a lower house.
Block Vote (BV) – A plurality-majority system used in multi-member districts in which
electors have as many votes as there are candidates to be elected. Voting can be
either candidate-centred or party-centred. Counting is identical to a First Past the Post
system, with the candidates with the highest vote totals winning the seats.
Candidate-centred Ballot – A form of ballot in which an elector chooses between candidates.
Categorical Ballot – A form of ballot in which only a single choice for a candidate or
party can be made.
Closed List – A form of List Proportional Representation in which electors are restricted
to voting for a party only, and cannot express a preference for any candidate within
a party list.
Communal Roll – A register of voters in which ascriptive criteria such as race or
ethnicity determine which electors can enrol to vote, and which candidates can be
elected, within the wider electoral contest.
Compensatory Seats – The List PR seats in a Mixed Member Proportional system which
are awarded to parties on the basis of their proportion of the national vote and
designed to correct any disproportionality in the results of the elections held in
plurality-majority district seats.
Constituency – A synonym for district, used predominantly in Anglophone countries
outside of the United States.
Contiguous districts – Districts comprised of areas which are geographically adjoined or
touching.
Cross Cutting Cleavages – Political allegiances of voters which cut across societal cleavages
of ethnicity, religion, or class.
Cumulation – The capacity within some systems of List Proportional Representation to
cast more than one vote for a favoured candidate.
145

d’Hondt Formula – One way of working out List PR results by the highest average
method. Uses divisors of 1,2,3,4, etc.
Democratic Consolidation – The process by which a nation’s political institutions and
democratic procedures become legitimized and broadly accepted by both political
actors and the wider population.
Distribution Requirements – The requirement that to win election a candidate must
not merely win a specified proportion of the vote nationally but also a specified
degree of support from different regions.
District – Geographic areas into which a country is divided for electoral purposes.
Districts may return one member to parliament, or more than one.
District Magnitude – The number of members to be elected in each district.
Droop Quota – Used in highest average List PR and STV electoral systems to determine
how seats are awarded. The quota is ascertained by the following formula: total
vote divided by the number of seats plus one, then one is added to the product.
Electoral Formula – That part of the electoral system dealing specifically with the
translation of votes into seats.
Electoral Law – The constitutional and legal provisions governing all aspects of the
electoral process.
Electoral System – That part of the electoral rules which determines electoral outcomes;
chiefly, the electoral formula, the ballot structure, and district magnitude.
First Past the Post (FPTP) – The simplest form of plurality-majority electoral system, using
single-member districts, a categorical ballot and candidate-centred voting. The winning
candidate is the one who gains more votes than any other candidate, but not
necessarily a majority of votes.
Free List – A form of List Proportional Representation which provides for apparentement or
cumulation.
Gerrymandering – The deliberate manipulation of district boundaries so as to advantage
or disadvantage a particular interest.
Hagenbach-Bischoff Formula – Another term for the Droop Quota.
Hare Quota – Used in largest remainder PR electoral systems to determine how seats are
awarded. The quota is ascertained by the following formula: total vote divided by
the number of seats.
Heterogeneous – Diverse and/or inter-mixed.
Highest Average Method – A formula used with List PR systems to translate votes into
seats. Party vote totals are divided by a series of devisors, under d’Hondt (by 1,2,3,
etc.) or Sainte-Laguë (by 1,3,5, etc.) formulae. After each stage the party with the
highest average wins the seat. The count continues with party vote totals being
divided by sequential numbers until all seats are filled.
Homogeneous – Similar and/or uniform.
Imperiali Quota – Sometimes used in largest remainder PR electoral systems to determine
how seats are awarded. The quota is ascertained by the following formula: total
vote divided by the number of seats plus two.
Index of Disproportionality – A figure which illustrates the collective disparity between
the votes cast for parties in an election and the seats in parliament they win.
146

Invalid Votes – Ballots which, due to accidental or deliberate errors of marking on the
part of voters, are unable to be included in the count.
Largest Remainder Method – The Hare, Droop and Imperiali calculation methods which
translate votes into seats within List PR systems. There are two stages to the count.
First, parties are awarded seats in proportion to the number of quotas they fulfil
(quotas vary depending on which of the three systems are used). Second, remaining
seats are awarded to parties on the basis of the left over votes they posess
after the “quota” stage of the count. Largest remainder seats are allocated in order
of vote size.
Lemas – A form of apparentement used predominantly in Latin America.
Limited Vote – A plurality-majority system used in multi-member districts in which electors
have more than one vote but fewer votes than there are candidates to be elected.
Counting is identical to a First Past the Post system, with the candidates with the
highest vote totals winning the seats.
List Proportional Representation (List PR) – In its most simple form List PR involves
each party presenting a list of candidates to the electorate, voters vote for a party,
and parties receive seats in proportion to their overall share of the national vote.
Winning candidates are taken from the lists.
Lower House – The first, and usually most important, chamber in a bi-cameral parliament.
Malapportionment – The uneven distribution of voters between electoral districts.
Majority-Plurality (Two-Round System) – In French Two-Round elections any candidate
who has received the votes of over 12.5 per cent of the registered electorate in the
first round can stand in the second round. Whoever wins the highest numbers of
votes in the second round is then declared elected, regardless of whether they have
won an absolute majority or not. We therefore refer to it as majority-plurality
variant of the Two-Round System.
Majority-Runoff (Two-Round System) – The most common method for the second round
of voting in a Two-Round System is a straight “run-off” contest between the two
highest vote-winners from the first round – this we term a majority-runoff system.
Manufactured Majority – Where a single party wins less than 50 per cent of the valid
votes, but an absolute majority of the parliamentary seats.
Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) – Systems in which a proportion of the parliament
(usually half) is elected from plurality-majority districts, while the remaining members
are chosen from PR lists. Under MMP the list PR seats compensate for any
disproportionality produced by the district seat results.
Multi-Member District – A district from which more than one member is elected to
parliament.
Open List – A form of List Proportional Representation in which electors can express a
preference for a candidate within a party list, as well as voting for the party.
Ordinal Ballot – A form of ballot in which a voter’s choice can be rank-ordered (as for
preferential systems), changed between one round of voting and the next (as for Two-
Round Systems) or split between two or more parties or candidates (as for Block and
panachage list PR systems).
147

Panachage – A device used in some List Proportional Representation systems which
enables an elector to vote for more than one candidate across different party lists.
Parallel System – A semi-proportional system in which proportional representation is used in
conjunction with a plurality-majority system but where, unlike MMP, the PR seats
do not compensate for any disproportionality arising from elections to the pluralitymajority
seats.
Party Block Vote (PB) – A form of the Block Vote in which electors choose between
parties rather than candidates. The successful party will typically win every seat in
the district.
Party-centred Ballot – A form of ballot in which an elector chooses between parties.
Plurality-Majority Systems – The distinguishing feature of plurality-majority systems is
that they almost always use single-member districts. In a First Past the Post system, the
winner is the candidate with a plurality of votes, but not necessarily an absolute
majority of the votes. When this system is used in multi-member districts it becomes
the Block Vote. Majority systems, such as the Australian Alternative Vote and the
French Two-Round System, try to ensure that the winning candidate receives an
absolute majority of votes cast.
Preferential Voting – Electoral systems in which voters can rank-order candidates on the
ballot paper in order of their choice. The Alternative Vote, the Single Transferable
Vote and the system used to elect the Sri Lankan president are all examples of preferential
voting.
Proportional Representation (PR) – Any system which consciously attempts to reduce
the disparity between a party’s share of the national vote and its share of the parliamentary
seats. For example, if a party wins 40 per cent of the votes, it should
win approximately 40 per cent of the seats.
Quota – The threshold for winning a seat in proportional representation systems.
Regional Fiefdom – A situation in which one party wins all, or nearly all, of the seats
in a particular geographic region.
Reserved Seats – Seats in which some ascriptive criteria such as religion, ethnicity,
language, gender etc. is a requirement for election.
Sainte-Laguë Formula – One way of working out List PR results by the highest average
method. Uses divisors of 1,3,5,7, etc.
Semi-Proportional Systems (Semi-PR) – Those electoral systems which provide, on average,
results which fall some way in between the proportionality of PR systems and
the disproportionality of plurality-majority systems.
Single-Member District – A district from which only one member is elected to parliament.
Single Non-Transferable Vote (SNTV) – A semi-proportional system which combines multimember
districts with a First Past the Post method of vote counting, and in which
electors have only one vote.
Single Transferable Vote (STV) – A preferential proportional representation system used in
multi-member districts. To gain election, candidates must surpass a specified quota of
first-preference votes. Voters’ preferences are re-allocated to other continuing candidates
when an unsuccessful candidate is excluded or if an elected candidate has a
surplus.
148

Threshold – The minimum level of support which a party needs to gain representation;
usually expressed as a percentage of the total vote.
Two-Tier Districting – Where seats are awarded to parties from both single member
districts and national PR lists, or both regional and national PR lists.
Two-Round System (TRS) – A plurality-majority system in which a second election is
held if no candidate achieves an absolute majority of votes in the first election.
Upper House – The second, and usually less important, chamber of a bi-cameral parliament.
Wasted Votes – Those votes which did not ultimately count towards the election of a
particular candidate or party.
149

150

Further Reading
ANNEX C
Amy, Douglas. 1993. Real Choices: New Voices: The Case for PR Elections in the United
States. New York, Columbia University Press.
Asmal, Kader. 1990. Electoral Systems: A Critical Survey. Bellville: Centre for
Development Studies, University of the Western Cape.
Barkan, Joel D. 1995. “Elections in Agrarian Societies”, Journal of Democracy 6: 106-116.
Bogdanor, Vernon and David Butler. eds. 1983. Democracy and Elections. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bogdanor, Vernon. 1984. What is Proportional Representation? Oxford: Martin Robertson.
Boston, Jonathan, Stephen Levine, Elizabeth McLeay, and Nigel S. Roberts. 1996.
New Zealand Under MMP: A New Politics? Auckland: Auckland University Press.
Butler, David, Howard Penniman and Austin Ranney. 1981. Democracy at the Polls: A
Comparative Study of Competitive National Elections. Washington DC: American Enterprise
Institute.
Catt, Helena, Paul Harris and Nigel S. Roberts. 1992. Voter’s Choice: Electoral Change
in New Zealand? Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Elklit, Jørgen and Nigel Roberts. 1996. “A Category of its Own? Four PR Two-
Tier Compensatory Member Electoral Systems in 1994”, European Journal of Political
Research 30: 217-240.
Elklit, Jørgen. 1993. “Simpler than its Reputation: The Electoral System in Denmark
since 1920”, Electoral Studies 12: 41-57.
Farrell, David M. 1997. Comparing Electoral Systems. London: Prentice Hall/Harvester
Wheatsheaf.
Finer, S. E. ed. 1975. Adversary Politics and Electoral Reform. London: Anthony Wigram.
Gallagher, Michael. 1992. “Comparing Proportional Representation Electoral
Systems: Quotas, Thresholds, Paradoxes, and Majorities”, British Journal of Political
Science 22: 469-496.
Grofman, Bernard and Arend Lijphart. eds. 1986. Electoral Laws and their Political
Consequences. New York: Agathon Press.
151

Grofman, Bernard and Chandler Davidson. eds. 1992. Controversies in Minority Voting.
Washington DC: Brookings.
Grofman, Bernard, Arend Lijphart, Robert McKay and Howard Scarrow. eds.
1982. Representation and Redistricting Issues. Lexington: Lexington Books.
Guinier, Lani. 1994. The Tyranny of the Majority. New York: Free Press.
Hermens, Ferdinand. 1972. Democracy or Anarchy? A Study of Proportional Representation,
2nd ed. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation.
Horowitz, Donald L. 1991. A Democratic South Africa?: Constitutional Engineering in a
Divided Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Horowitz, Donald L. 1993. “Democracy in Divided Societies”, Journal of Democracy
4: 18-38.
Inter-Parliamentary Union. 1993. Electoral Systems: A World-wide Comparative Study.
Geneva: Inter-Parliamentary Union.
Jones, Mark P. 1995. Electoral Laws and the Survival of Presidential Democracies. Notre
Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Kotzë, Hennie. 1992. President’s Council Report on a Proportional Polling System for South
Africa in a New Constitutional Dispensation. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Lakeman, Enid. 1974. How Democracies Vote. London: Faber and Faber.
Lardeyret, Guy. 1991. “The Problem with PR”, Journal of Democracy 2: 30-35.
LeDuc, Lawrence, Richard G. Niemi and Pippa Norris. eds. 1996. Comparing
Democracies: Elections and Voting in Global Perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Lijphart, Arend, and Bernard Grofman, eds. 1984. Choosing an Electoral System: Issues
and Alternatives. New York: Praeger.
Lijphart, Arend. 1984. Democracies. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lijphart, Arend. 1990. “Electoral Systems, Party Systems, and Conflict Management
in Segmented Societies”, pp. 2-13. In Robert A. Schrire, ed. Critical Choices for South
Africa. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
Lijphart, Arend. 1991a. “Constitutional Choices for New Democracies”, Journal of
Democracy 2: 72-84.
Lijphart, Arend. 1991b. “Proportional Representation: Double Checking the
Evidence”, Journal of Democracy 2: 42-48.
Lijphart, Arend. 1994. Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven
Democracies, 1945-1990. New York: Oxford University Press.
152

Lijphart, Arend. 1995a. “Electoral Systems”, pp. 412-422. In Lipset. ed. The
Encyclopedia of Democracy. Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Lijphart, Arend. 1995b. “Proportional Representation”, pp. 1010-1015. In Lipset. ed.
The Encyclopedia of Democracy. Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Lovenduski, Joni and Pippa Norris. eds. 1993. Gender and Party Politics. London:
Sage.
Mackie, Thomas and Richard Rose. 1982. The International Almanac of Electoral
History. Washington D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Mackie, Thomas and Richard Rose. 1997. A Decade of Election Results: Updating the
International Almanac. Studies in Public Policy, Glasgow: Centre for the Study of
Public Policy, University of Strathclyde.
Moyo, Jonathan. 1992. Voting for Democracy: A Study of Electoral Politics in Zimbabwe.
Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications.
Nohlen, Dieter. 1996. Elections and Electoral Systems. Dehli: MacMillan.
Nohlen, Dieter. ed. 1993. Encilopedia Electoral Latinamericana y del Caribe. San Jose:
IIDH/CAPEL.
Pitkin, Hanna F. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Pitkin, Hanna F. 1969. Representation. New York: Atherton Press.
Quade, Quentin. 1991. “PR and Democratic Statecraft”, Journal of Democracy 2: 36-41.
Rae, Douglas W. 1967. The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
Reeve, Andrew and Alan Ware. 1992. Electoral Systems: A Comparative and Theoretical
Introduction. London and New York: Routledge.
Reilly, Ben. 1997a. “Preferential Voting and Political Engineering: A Comparative
Study”, Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Studies 35: 1-19.
Reilly, Ben. 1997b . “The Alternative Vote and Ethnic Accommodation: New
Evidence from Papua New Guinea”, Electoral Studies 16: 1-11.
Reynolds, Andrew and Timothy D. Sisk. 1997. “Elections, Electoral Systems, and
Conflict Management”, forthcoming. In Sisk and Reynolds. eds. Elections and Conflict
Resolution in Africa. Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Reynolds, Andrew. 1993. Voting for a New South Africa. Cape Town: Maskew Miller
Longman.
153

Reynolds, Andrew. 1995. “The Case for Proportionality”, Journal of Democracy 6:
117-124.
Rule, Wilma and Joseph Zimmerman. eds. 1994. Electoral Systems in Comparative
Perspective: Their Impact on Women and Minorities. Westport: Greenwood.
Sartori, Giovanni. 1994. Comparative Constitutional Engineering: An Inquiry Into Structures,
Incentives, and Outcomes. New York: Columbia University Press.
Shugart, Mathew S. and John Carey. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional
Design and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sisk, Timothy D. 1996. Power Sharing and International Mediation in Ethnic Conflicts.
Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Taagepera, Rein and Matthew S. Shugart. 1989. Seats and Votes: The Effects and
Determinants of Electoral Systems. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Vengroff, Richard. 1994. “The Impact of Electoral System on the Transition to
Democracy in Africa: The Case of Mali”, Electoral Studies 13: 29-37.
154

155

Electoral System Impact
on the Translation of Votes into Seats
ANNEX D
Let us take a hypothetical election (of 25,000 votes contested by two political parties)
run under two different sets of electoral rules: a plurality-majority First Past The Post
system with five single member districts, and a List PR election with one large district.
Example One
Constituencies
Seats Won
1
2
3
4
5
Total
%
P-M
PR
Party A
Party B
3,000
2,000
5,000
2,600
2,400
5,000
2,551
2,449
5,000
2,551
2,449
5,000
100
4,900
5,000
10,802
14,198
25,000
43
57
100
4
1
2
3
© International IDEA.
Key: P-M= Plurality-Majority system (FPTP), PR = Proportional Representation system.
In our example Party A with 43% of the votes wins far fewer votes than Party B
(with 57%) but under a Plurality-Majority system they win four out of the five seats
available. Conversely, under a proportional system Party B wins more seats (three)
against two seats for Party A. This example may appear extreme but similar constituency
results occur quite regularly in plurality-majority elections.
In our second example the distribution of the votes is changed and there are now five
parties contesting the election, but the two hypothetical electoral systems remain the
same.
Example Two
Districts
Seats Won
1
2
3
4
5
Total
%
P-M
PR
Party A
Party B
Party C
Party D
Party E
3,000
500
500
750
250
5,000
2,000
500
250
500
1,750
5,000
2,000
500
750
1,700
50
5,000
200
3,750
1,000
25
25
5,000
50
500
3,000
1,025
425
5,000
7,250
5,750
5,500
4,000
2,500
25,000
29
23
22
16
10
100
3
1
1
0
0
5
1
1
1
1
1
5
© International IDEA.
Key: P-M= Plurality-Majority system (FPTP), PR = Proportional Representation system (using the Largest
remainder method of seat allocation with a Hare quota).
156

In the second example five parties are competing. Under the PR system every party
wins a single seat despite the fact that Party A wins nearly three times as many votes
as Party E. Under a FPTP system the largest Party (A) would have picked up a majority
of the five seats with the next two highest polling parties (B and C) winning a
single seat each. The choice of electoral system thus has a dramatic effect on the
composition of the parliament and, by extension, the government.
157

158

Authors and Advisory Group
ANNEX E
Andrew Reynolds
Andrew Reynolds is a British national and a Programme Officer at the International
Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. From August 1997 he will be an
assistant professor in the Department of Government and International Studies at the
University of Notre Dame, U.S.A. His books include Elections and Conflict Resolution in
Africa (co-editor, 1997), Election ‘94: South Africa – An Analysis of the Results, Campaigns
and Future Prospects (editor, 1994) and Voting for a New South Africa (1993). He has
written articles appearing in the Journal of Democracy, Politics and Society, and
Electoral Studies.
Ben Reilly
Ben Reilly is an Australian political scientist and a Programme Officer at the
International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. He has previously
served as an adviser on constitutional reform issues in the Prime Minister’s Department
in Canberra, with the Australian Electoral Commission, and with the United
Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia. He has written widely about electoral
matters in the Asia-Pacific region, with book chapters and articles appearing in
Electoral Studies, The Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, and
Representation.
Kader Asmal
Kader Asmal taught law at Trinity College Dublin for nearly 30 years, and, after his
return from exile, was a participant in negotiations for a new, democratic constitution
in South Africa. He is co-author of Reconciliation Through Truth (1996). He is Minister
of Water Affairs and Forestry in the South African government.
Sarah Birch
Sarah Birch is a lecturer in the politics of the Ukraine at the University of Essex in
the United Kingdom. She has published articles on Ukrainian electoral systems and
electoral behaviour.
159

John Carey
John M. Carey is assistant professor of political science at Washington University in
St. Louis, U.S.A. He has taught comparative politics at the University of Rochester
and at the Universidad Católica de Chile. His books include Presidents and Assemblies:
Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics (co-author, 1992), Term Limits and Legislative
Representation (1996), and Executive Decree Authority: Calling out the Tanks or Filling Out
the Forms? (forthcoming).
Mona Makram Ebeid
Mona Makram Ebeid is a professor of political science at the American University in
Cairo and was formerly a member of the Egyptian parliament. She has written
extensively on foreign policy in the Arab world, as well as various aspects of social
and political life in Egypt.
Jørgen Elklit
Jørgen Elklit teaches at the Department of Political Science at the University of
Aarhus (Denmark) and consults on a wide range of democratization and election related
issues. In this capacity he has been active in thirteen countries in Asia, Africa, and
Europe. He was (in a personal capacity) a member of the South African Independent
Electoral Commission in 1994 and is now engaged in the Bosnian Opstina elections’
out-of-country voting programme. He has published books and articles on elections,
electoral systems, methodology, Danish politics, and the German minority in
Denmark.
Michael Gallagher
Michael Gallagher is a lecturer in political science at Trinity College, University of
Dublin. He has written a number of articles on electoral systems and the politics of
referendums, and is co-author of Representative Government in Modern Europe (1995).
Yash Ghai
Yash Ghai is the Sir YK Pao Professor of Public Law at the University of Hong Kong.
He has taught in Tanzania, Britain, the US, Sweden, Singapore and Fiji. He has been
a consultant on constitutions and electoral systems to a number of governments and
political parties. He has published extensively on comparative public law, human
rights, ethnic relations, state-owned companies and the sociology of law. His most
recent book is Hong Kong’s New Constitutional Order: The Resumption of Chinese Sovereignty
and the Basic Law (1997).
160

Michael Krennerich
Michael Krennerich received his Ph.D. from the University of Heidelberg in
Germany where he works as a Research Fellow. His books include Wahlen und
Antiregimekriege in Zentralamerika (1996) and Elections in Africa: A Data Handbook (coedited
with Dieter Nohlen and Bernhard Thibaut, forthcoming). He has consulted on
questions of electoral systems and party funding in South Africa, Panama and
Thailand.
Arend Lijphart
Arend Lijphart has written extensively on the subject of constitutional and electoral
system design, especially in his books Democracy in Plural Societies (1977), Power-Sharing
in South Africa (1985), and Electoral Systems and Party Systems (1994). Lijphart is research
professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego. He has also
taught at the University of California, Berkeley (1963–68) and at the University of
Leiden in the Netherlands (1968–78). During 1995–96, he served as President of the
American Political Science Association.
René Antonio Mayorga
René Antonio Mayorga, gained his Ph.D. from the Free University of Berlin, is director
of the Centro Boliviano de Estudios Multidisciplinarios, and professor at the Joint
Masters Program of the Catholic University and the Harvard University in La Paz,
Bolivia. He has published on democratic development and electoral issues in Latin
America. His most recent book is Antipolitica y Neopopulismo (1996).
Edward McMahon
Ned McMahon is Regional Director for East and Central Africa at the National
Democratic Institute for International Affairs in Washington DC. He has also developed
and implemented democratic development projects in Asia and eastern Europe.
Shaheen Mozaffar
Shaheen Mozaffar is an associate professor of political science at Bridgewater State
College, Massachusetts, and research fellow of the African Studies Center at Boston
University. He has authored articles and book chapters on the colonial state, ethnic
politics, regime change, democratization, and electoral politics in Africa.
Vijay Patidar
Vijay Patidar is an electoral returning officer in India. He has consulted on issues of
electoral administration, most recently for the United Nations in Vukovar, Croatia.
161

Mahesh Rangarajan
Mahesh Rangarajan is an environmental historian and a political consultant based in
Delhi, India. He is currently a Fellow at the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library.
Nigel Roberts
Nigel S. Roberts is an associate professor of politics at the Victoria University of
Wellington. Together with Jonathan Boston, Stephen Levine, and Elizabeth McLeay,
he is a member of a research team funded by the New Zealand Foundation for
Research, Science, and Technology which is studying the administrative and political
consequences of the introduction of proportional representation in New Zealand. His
most recent book is New Zealand under MMP: A New Politics? (co-author, 1996).
Wilma Rule
Wilma Rule is an adjunct professor of political science at the University of Reno,
Nevada. Her major research interests are the legislative recruitment of Anglo and
minority women and the effect that electoral systems have on women’s political
opportunity. She is the co-author of Electoral Systems in Comparative Perspective: Their
Impact on Women and Minorities (1994).
Nadezhda Shvedova
Nadezhda Shvedova is a senior researcher at the Institute of the USA and Canada, in
Moscow. She has written and lectured extensively on the question of woman, electoral
politics, and democratization in Russia.
Sir Anthony Siaguru
Sir Anthony Siaguru is a lawyer in private practice in Papua New Guinea. A former
senior bureaucrat and cabinet minister in his country, he most recently served as
Deputy Secretary-General of the Commonwealth of Nations.
Jan Sundberg
Jan Sundberg is a professor of political science at the University of Helsinki in
Finland. He has written widely on electoral politics and the dynamics of the Finnish
party system.
162

163

164

About International IDEA
ANNEX F
International IDEA was founded by fourteen states at a conference in Stockholm in
February 1995, and started working as a fully-fledged organization in mid-1996. The
members of the Institute are Australia, Barbados, Belgium, Costa Rica, Chile, Denmark,
Finland, India, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, the
Inter-American Institute of Human Rights (IIHR), the International Press Institute (IPI)
and Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA). It also has co-operative agreements
with the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)
and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Switzerland also contributes
to the work of the Institute. International IDEA’s statutes allow for new members.
The Board of Directors
Sir Shridath Ramphal (Chairman), former Secretary-General of the Commonwealth
and Co-Chairman of the Commission on Global Governance. Ambassador Thorvald
Stoltenberg (Vice-Chairman), Ambassador of Norway to Denmark, former Foreign
Minister and Minister of Defence of Norway, and UN Special Representative in the
former Yugoslavia. Hon Henry de Boulay Forde, lawyer and former Foreign Minister
and Attorney General of Barbados. Dr. Adama Dieng, Secretary-General of the
International Commission of Jurists. Dr. Frene Ginwala, Speaker of the National
Assembly, South Africa. Prof. Colin Hughes, Professor of Political Science,
University of Queensland and former Electoral Commissioner of Australia. Mrs.
Monica Jimenez de Barros, Executive Director of PARTICIPA and member of the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Chile. Mr. Manmohan Malhoutra, former
Assistant Secretary-General of the Commonwealth and adviser to the former Prime
Minister of India, Mrs. Indira Gandhi. Lord Steel of Aikwood, member of the House
of Lords, former British MP, former leader of the British Liberal Party, founding
member of the Liberal Democratic Party, and former President of Liberal
International. Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, General Secretary of the National League for
Democracy in Burma and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
The Institute’s work is not the reflection of any specific national interest, but is based
on the Statutes on which the members have agreed.
The objectives of the Institute are:
• To promote and advance sustainable democracy world-wide;
• To broaden the understanding and promote the implementation and dissemination
of the norms, rules and guidelines that apply to multi-party pluralism and democratic
processes;
• To strengthen and support national capacity to develop the full range of democratic
instruments;
165

• To provide a meeting-place for exchanges between all those involved in electoral
processes in the context of democratic institution-building;
• To increase knowledge and enhance learning about democratic electoral processes;
• To promote transparency and accountability, professionalism and efficiency in the
electoral process in the context of democratic development.
International IDEA has the following advantageous characteristics which assist it in
undertaking such tasks:
• It is global in ownership and scope;
• It is expressly devoted to advancing democracy as its main task;
• It brings together in its governing body, on an equal footing, governments and
professional international organizations involved in the process of furthering
democracy, and
• It regards democracy as an evolving process and is able to take on long-term
projects.
Decisions about what work International IDEA undertakes is guided, in part, by the
uniqueness of its members, which in turn reflect the diverse partners that are found
in national democracies. The governments and organizations that founded International
IDEA believed that the time had come for the creation of a dynamic Institute that
could creatively and practically assist in sustaining and developing a democratic
process in a large number of countries.
The Institute’s Work in the area of “Rules and Guidelines”
There is now a new world-wide focus on democratic governance. Accordingly, the
challenge of achieving acceptable standards of government, both internationally and
domestically, is more urgent than ever. With governance issues squarely on the
agenda it is appropriate that International IDEA should focus on the norms, guidelines
and values which underlie the democratic and, more specifically, the electoral process.
The Institute’s work in the area of »Rules and Guidelines« is to strengthen and
promote both norms and guidelines (in the sense of consensually accepted standards
and advice) and the making available of “best” practices and options. This includes
discussions on the interpretation of existing norms and the formulation of working
tools and instruments to facilitate their application. This involves the identification,
retrieval and dissemination of information and expertise in order to widen the range
of options and choices available to those interested in the consolidation of democracy.
A further objective of this programme is the development of communication networks
between electoral commissions, around the world, in order to provide an information
exchange and offer electoral assistance for these commissions and governments.
166

General Publications
Beyond Elections ‘96: A Two-Year Window of Opportunity for Democracy –
Proposals for the Transition towards Peace and Democracy in Bosnia and
Herzegovina.
Code of Conduct Series
– Code of Conduct for the Ethical and Professional Discharge of Election
Observation Activities.
– Code of Conduct for the Ethical and Professional Discharge of Election
Administration Activities.
Evaluating Election Observation Missions: Lessons Learned From the Russian
Elections of 1996.
International Election Observation: Lessons Learned (A round table jointly organized
by the United Nations Electoral Assistance Division and International IDEA, October
10-12, 1995).
Proceedings of the Democracy Forum ‘96.
Report of the round table on National Capacity-Building for Democracy (February
12-14, 1996).
The International IDEA Capacity-Building Series:
– Consolidating Democracy in Nepal.
– Democracy in Romania: An Assessment Mission Report.
Voter Turnout from 1945 to 1997: A Global Report on Political Participation. (A comprehensive
world-wide compilation of voter turnout statistics from 1945 to today.)
Publications about International IDEA
Newsletter Quarterly
International IDEA’s Statutes
International IDEA’s Declaration
Work In Progress, June 1997
Information Brochure
Information Leaflet
167

For more information
about International IDEA’s publications,
languages in which they are available and upcoming publications,
please contact the International IDEA headquarters.
Address: Strömsborg, S-10334 Stockholm, Sweden
Phone: +46-8-6983700
Fax: +46-8-202422
E-mail: info@int-idea.se
Website: http://www.int-idea.se
168

169

170