Electoral systems shape how votes translate into political power. Majoritarian systems aim for clear winners, while proportional representation allocates seats based on vote share. These differences profoundly impact party systems, campaign strategies, and representation.
The choice of electoral system influences political stability and minority representation. Majoritarian systems often lead to two-party dominance and single-party governments, while proportional systems foster multi-party landscapes and coalitions. Each has its own strengths and challenges for governance.
Electoral Systems
Majoritarian vs proportional representation systems
- Majoritarian electoral systems aim to produce a clear winner or majority
- First-past-the-post (FPTP) candidate with the most votes wins, even without a majority
- Two-round system (TRS) if no candidate wins a majority in the first round, a second round is held between the top two candidates
- Proportional representation (PR) electoral systems allocate seats in proportion to the votes received by each party
- Party-list PR voters choose a party, and seats are allocated based on the percentage of votes each party receives
- Single transferable vote (STV) voters rank candidates in order of preference, and seats are allocated based on a quota system
Effects of electoral systems
- Majoritarian systems favor a two-party system due to Duverger's law
- "Spoiler effect" and "wasted vote" phenomenon discourage voting for smaller parties
- Encourages formation of single-party governments or coalitions between ideologically similar parties
- PR systems favor multi-party systems
- Lower electoral thresholds allow smaller parties to gain representation
- Encourages formation of coalition governments, often between ideologically diverse parties
- Electoral systems influence the nature of political campaigns and party strategies
- Majoritarian systems focus on winning individual districts, leading to more localized and candidate-centered campaigns
- PR systems focus on maximizing overall vote share, leading to more nationalized and party-centered campaigns
Electoral systems and political stability
- Majoritarian systems associated with greater political stability
- Clear winners and single-party governments can lead to more decisive decision-making and policy implementation
- May also lead to exclusion of significant portions of the electorate and concentration of power in a single party
- PR systems associated with greater political instability
- Coalition governments may be more prone to deadlock, compromise, and collapse
- May also lead to greater consensus-building and inclusion of a wider range of political perspectives
Electoral design for representation
- Majoritarian systems may disadvantage minority groups and smaller parties
- FPTP systems can lead to underrepresentation of geographically dispersed or politically diverse minorities
- High electoral thresholds can prevent smaller parties from gaining representation
- PR systems may facilitate greater minority representation and political inclusion
- Lower electoral thresholds allow smaller parties and minority groups to gain representation
- STV can enable voters to express preferences for individual candidates, potentially increasing representation of diverse interests
- Electoral system design can incorporate specific measures to enhance minority representation
- Reserved seats for minority groups (Māori seats in New Zealand)
- Proportional representation within multi-member districts (mixed-member proportional system in Germany)
- Quotas for underrepresented groups (gender quotas in Rwanda)