Apportionment methods

Horst F. Niemeyer and Alice C. Niemeyer

Mathematical Social Sciences, 2008, vol. 56, issue 2, 240-253

Abstract: Most democratic countries use apportionment methods to transform election results into whole numbers, which usually give the number of seats in a legislative body that the parties obtained. Which apportionment method does this best can be specified by measuring the error between the allocated result and the ideal proportion. We show how to find an apportionment method which is best suited to a given error function. We also discuss several properties of apportionment methods that have been labelled paradoxa. In particular we explain the highly publicised "Alabama" Paradox for the Hare/Hamilton method and show that other popular apportionment methods come with their very own paradoxa.

Keywords: Apportionment; method; D'Hondt; method; Hare/Hamilton; method; Alabama; Paradox; Sainte-Laguë; method (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(08)00035-8
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:56:y:2008:i:2:p:240-253

Access Statistics for this article

Mathematical Social Sciences is currently edited by J.-F. Laslier

More articles in Mathematical Social Sciences from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().