Comparing the Aitchison distance and the angular distance for use as inequality or disproportionality measures for votes and seats

Thomas Colignatus ()

MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany

Abstract: Votes and seats satisfy only two of seven criteria for application of the Aitchison distance. Vectors of votes and seats, say for elections for political parties the House of Representatives, can be normalised to 1 or 100%, and then have the outward appearance of compositional data. The Aitchison geometry and distance for compositional data then might be considered for votes and seats too. However, there is an essential zero when a party gets votes but doesn't gain a seat, and a zero gives an undefined logratio. In geology, changing from weights to volumes affects the percentages but not the Aitchison distance. For votes and seats there are no different scales or densities per party component however, and thus reportioning (perturbation) would be improper. Another key issue is subcompositional dominance. For votes {10, 20, 70} and seats {20, 10, 70} it is essential that we consider three parties. For a disproportionality measure we would value it positively that there is a match on 70. The Aitchison distance looks at the ratio {10, 20, 70} / {20, 10, 70} = {1/2, 2, 1} and then neglects a ratio equal to 1. In this case it essentially compares the subcompositions, i.e. votes {10, 20} and seats {20, 10}, rescales to {1/3, 2/3} and {2/3, 1/3}, and finds high disproportionality. This means that it essentially looks at a two party outcome instead of a three party outcome. It follows that votes and seats are better served by another distance measure. Suggested is the angular distance and the Sine-Diagonal Inequality / Disproportionality (SDID) measure based upon this. Users may of course apply both the angular and the Aitchison measures while being aware of the crucial differences in properties.

Keywords: Votes; Seats; Electoral System; Distance; Disproportionality; Aitchison Geometry; Angular Distance; Sine-Diagonal Inequality / Disproportionality; Loosemore-Hanby; Gallagher; Descriptive Statistics; Education; Reportion (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A10 D63 D71 D72 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018-01-18, Revised 2018-02-03
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cdm and nep-pol
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/84334/1/MPRA_paper_84334.pdf original version (application/pdf)
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/84387/9/MPRA_paper_84387.pdf revised version (application/pdf)

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:pra:mprapa:84334

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Joachim Winter ().