Electoral Pacts and Proportionality of Representation. Evidence from Chile, 2017
No. 103 (2020-07-01)Author(s)
-
Ricardo GamboaInstituto de Estudios Internacionales, Universidad de Chile
-
Mauricio MoralesEscuela de Ciencia Política y Administración Pública, Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, Universidad de Talca, Campus Santiago
Abstract
Objective/context: This article analyzes the effects of the Chilean electoral reform on proportionality, focusing mainly on electoral pacts. Methodology: The research uses data of the election of the Chilean Chamber of Deputies of 2017, in order to calculate the effects of two variables on proportionality within the electoral pacts: party size and number of seats obtained. Moreover, it analyzes the strategies of small parties in order to maximize their gains. Conclusions: Proportionality within electoral pacts depends on the number of seats obtained and the size of the parties. Small parties that concentrate their candidacies in few districts and thereby use their economic resources more efficiently, can maximize their benefits within the pact. Originality: The article provides new evidence regarding the effects of electoral pacts on seat allocation in proportional systems by analyzing a case that has not been studied until now.
References
Benoit, Kenneth. 2000. “Which Electoral Formula Is the Most Proportional? A New Look with New Evidence”. Political Analysis 8 (4): 381-388.
Blais, André, RomainLachat, AiroHino y PascalDoray-Demers. 2011. “The Mechanical and Psychological Effects of Electoral Systems: A Quasi-Experimental Study”. Comparative Political Studies 44 (2): 1599-1621.
Bochsler, Daniel. 2010. “Who Gains from Apparentments Under D’Hondt?”. Electoral Studies 29: 617-627.
Chasquetti, Daniel. 2017. “Sobre las reformas políticas en Chile, 2014-2016”. En Reformas políticas en Chile, 2014-2016, 53-105. Santiago de Chile: Ministerio Secretaría General de la Presidencia; IDEA.
Cox, Gary. 1997. Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farrell, David. 2001. Electoral Systems. A Comparative Introduction. Nueva York: Palgrave.
Gallagher, Michael. 1991. “Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems”. Electoral Studies 10 (1): 33-51.
Gallagher, Michael y PaulMitchell, eds. 2005. The Politics of Electoral Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gamboa, Ricardo y MauricioMorales. 2016. “Chile’s 2015 Electoral Reform: Changing the Rules of the Game”. Latin American Politics and Society 58 (4): 126-144.
Leutgäb, Peter y FriedrichPukelsheim. 2009. “List Apparentments in Local Elections. A Lottery”. Homo Oeconomicus 26 (3-4): 489-500.
Lijphart, Arendt. 1994. Electoral Systems and Party Systems. A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945-1990. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Loosemore, John y VictorHanby. 1971. “The Theoretical Limits of Maximum Distortion: Some Analytic Expressions for Electoral Systems”. British Journal of Political Science 1 (4): 467-477.
Maronna, Ricardo, DouglasMartin y VictorYohai. 2006. Robust Statistics: Theory and Methods. Chichester: Wiley.
Polga-Hecimovich, John y PeterSiavelis. 2015. “Here’s the Bias! A (Re-) Reassessment of the Chilean Electoral System”. Electoral Studies 40: 268-279.
Siavelis, Peter. 2004. “Sistema electoral, desintegración de coaliciones y democracia en Chile: ¿el fin de la concertación?”. Revista de Ciencia Política 24 (1): 58-80.
Taagepera, Rein y MatthewShugart. 1989. Seats and Votes. The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Zucco, Cesar. 2007. “Where’s the Bias? A Reassessment of the Chilean Electoral System”. Electoral Studies 26 (2): 303-314.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.