Contextual Determinants of Electoral System Choice - Ã bo Akademi

The degree of proportionality also varies between different types of mixedsystems. If half the seats are allocated according to the majoritarian rule and theother half is proportionally distributed, the final vote-seat ratio should theoreticallybe somewhere between that of pure majoritarian and PR elections. However, if thePR tier is aimed at compensating for the disproportionality in the nominal tier, themixed system becomes a proportional system in terms of effects. There are,furthermore, mixed systems that only partially correct the disproportionalitycaused by the majoritarian elections, which renders the classification of everymixed system according to the three-scale typology difficult. Another disadvantageof this classification is that it is by definition based on a particular feature ofelectoral systems, namely the degree of proportionality. Since the present study isnot concerned with effects of electoral systems but rather with explaining thevariety of electoral methods, a classification based on proportionality is notdesirable.Given the nature of the study, hence, the other common ground of classifyingelectoral systems appears more profound. As mentioned earlier, seats canprincipally be allocated in three different ways: by the plurality rule, by themajority rule, and proportionally among parties according to a specific quota ordivisor. It seems appropriate to regard these as separate categories of electoralsystems. Plurality and majority formulas certainly share some common features,especially in comparison with proportional systems, but the plurality and themajority rule have, notwithstanding, always been regarded as different electoralsystems. Before the introduction of PR a century ago, these were actually the mainalternatives of voting methods. All electoral systems that combine either theplurality or the majority rule with proportional allocation of seats constitute thefourth category of mixed electoral systems. This implies that e.g. the Germansystem, despite producing proportional election results, does not belong to theproportional category. I regard the characteristic of combining two differentelectoral systems in one election as more fundamental than the feature ofproportional seat distribution. Besides, the number of countries with MMP systemsis very small. This is also true of countries that have adopted the semi-proportionalSNTV during the second half of the twentieth century. In other words, the decisionnot to apply a category that exclusively identifies semi-proportional systemsaffects only a few cases.44