A diagram for analyzing ordinal voting systems

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 56 - Trang 143-171 - 2020
Andrew C. Eggers1
1Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Tóm tắt

I introduce a diagram for describing and analyzing single-winner elections in which voters rank the candidates—a class of voting systems including positional methods (e.g. plurality, Borda count, anti-plurality), Condorcet methods, and instant-runoff voting (i.e. ranked-choice voting or the alternative vote). The diagram shows how the outcome of an election depends on each candidate’s share of top rankings as a function of the voting system and the pattern of lower rankings. Using as examples two Brexit polls, a mayoral election in San Francisco, and the US’s first instant-runoff congressional election (all since 2018), I show how the diagram can concisely present preferences and results under different voting systems, identify Condorcet cycles, highlight system properties such as join-inconsistency and the no-show paradox, and illuminate strategic voting incentives.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Arrow KJ (1951) Social choice and individual values. Yale University Press, Yale Diss M, Tlidi A (2018) Another perspective on Borda’s paradox. Theor Decis 84(1):99–121 Duddy C (2017) Geometry of run-off elections. Public Choice 173(3–4):267–288 Dunleavy P, Diwakar R (2013) Analysing multiparty competition in plurality rule elections. Party Polit 19(6):855–886 Emerson P (2013) The original Borda count and partial voting. Soc Choice Welf 40(2):353–358 Farrell DM, McAllister I (2006) The Australian electoral system: origins, variations, and consequences. UNSW Press, Randwick Grofman B, Chiaramonte A, D’Alimonte R, Feld SL (2004) Comparing and contrasting the uses of two graphical tools for displaying patterns of multiparty competition: Nagayama diagrams and simplex representations. Party Polit 10(3):273–299 Ibbetson D (1965) Comment on Berrington, ‘The general election of 1964’. J R Stat Soc Ser A (Gener) 128(1):54–55 Kastellec JP, Leoni EL (2007) Using graphs instead of tables in political science. Perspect Polit 5(4):755–771 Katz JN, King G (1999) A statistical model for multiparty electoral data. Am Polit Sci Rev 93(1):15–32 Nurmi H (1999) Voting paradoxes and how to deal with them. Springer, Berlin Saari DG (1994) Geometry of voting. Springer, Berlin Saari DG (2008) Disposing dictators, demystifying voting paradoxes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Saari DG (2011) Geometry of voting. In: Arrow KJ, Sen A, Suzumura K (eds) Handbook of social choice and welfare, vol 2. Elsevier, New York, pp 897–945 chapter 27 Saari DG, Valognes F (1999) The geometry of Black’s single peakedness and related conditions. J Math Econ 32(4):429–456 Tideman N (2017) Collective decisions and voting: the potential for public choice. Routledge, Abingdon Tufte E (2001) The visual display of quantitative information, 2nd edn. Graphics Press, USA