UNIT7 ELECTORAL SYSTEMS AND

ELECTORAL PROCESSES"
Structure
7.0 Objcctives
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Classification of electoral systems
7.3 Majoritarian Systems
7.3.1 First-Past-the-Post/ Single-Member Plurality system
7.3.2 Second Ballot System
7.3.3 Alternative Vote (AV)/ Supplcmentary Votc (SV) system
7.3.4 Condorcet Method

7.4 Proportional Representation Systems

7.4.1 Single-Transferable-Vote (STV) System
7.4.2 Party-List System
7.5 Mixed Methods
7.5.1 Mixed-Member Proportional or Additional Member System
7.5.2 Semi-Proportional Method
7.5.3 Cumulative Votc System
7.5.4 Slate System
7.6 Comparative Assessment of Majoritarian and PR Systems
7.7 Let Us Sum Up
7.8 References

7.9 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises

Dr. Tulika Gaur, Guest Faculty, Non-Collegiate Women's Education Board, University of Delhi,
Delhi

97
 cithe

Represcntation
and Political 7.0 OBJECTIVES
Participation
An electoral system does not only set rules for election, but also plays crucial role
in shaping the party system and political culture of the country. This unit focuses
on electoral systems and processes. After going through this unit, you should be
able to:
Define electoral system,
Identify the various dimensions of an electoral system,
Assess combinations of electoral methods used by different countries in
their nationa! or local elections,
Examine the advantages and disadvantages of different kinds of electora!
systemns, and
Analyse the links between parties and electoral process.

7.1 INTRODUCTION

The electoral system refers to a set of rules through which people get to choose
their representatives or political leaders. It shapes the outcome of the election by
providing for an election mechanism and election process through which
representation of several political parties is determined in the legislature.
Electoralsystems not only work at the national levcl but are also uscd extensivcly
in determining the composition of local bodies. It is the deciding factor for the
various combinations of political parties/groups/individuals that exist at the
legislative and executive level in a country. Formation of coalitions, various
strategies opted by political parties to get into the legislature, and their election
manifestoes- all depend on what kind of electoral system exist in their political
system. An electoral system is not a static concept; rather it is a dynamic system
which has been evolving continuously as needed by the countries to suit their
political system. An electoral system well-defined facilitates the democratic
culture to perform in its true spirit.
A welI known comparative political science scholar, Bernard Groffman has
identified six basic components of an electoral system. These are l) detining the
eligibility for contesting the election (individuals or party or combination of
both); 2) specifying rules within the party for identifying the party's candidates
or setting the criteria for ranking the candidates in a party list, 3) specification of
ballot type, 4) specification of constituencies (districts), 5) determination of
election timing, and 6) rules for ballot aggregation. Apart trom this, the tem
electoral system is also used to refer to rules and regulations for the voters,
campaigning, advertising, deciding On phases of elections, and SO
(Krupaviius, lsoda, Vaianoras 2013).
As mentioned by Rae (1971), electoral systems have three dimensions: the ballot
structure, the district structure, and the electoral formula.
1. Ballot structure defines the nature of ballot system and the different ways in
which it is casted and counted. For instancc, whether votes are casted for
98
 Electoral Systems
cither Individuals or a group of individuals (party list) or a combination of and Elcctoral
both; how many votes are supposed to be casted for candidates and/or lists; in Processes
case mnore than one votes are to be casted, then whether it is based on
preference or rank of candidates/list in any order; and finally, whether there is
single round or multiplc rounds of voting.
2 District structurc comprises of the arca, number, and hicrarchy of clectoral
districts. Here, electoral districts are those areas in wlhich elections are
conducted. There can b one single seated or multiple seated district
structures, that is the entire country can be considered as a national electoral
district or it may be divided into several small elcctoral constitucncies. In
case of latter, there may exist a certain kind of hierarchy such as upper and
lower tiers. There may be one or many seats in any electoral district.
3 The electoral formula refers to the process througb which votes get
transformed into seats. The most popular fomulas are the plurality, majority,
and proportional representation (PR) systems. These formulas may vary as
per the district structure.

7.2 CLASSIFICATION OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS

Generally, the electoral systerm is classified into three main categories based on
the ruls decided for conversion of votes into seats in the legislature: first
category is the Majoritarian system; second is the Proportional Representative
system and thethird isthe Mixed system. Majoritarian Method refers to a system
where larger parties get to represent higher number of seats, while the
P

Proportional Representation (PR) systems depicts a system where seats are

decidcd in proportion to the votes acquired in the clcction. Mixed systems are the
combination of the majoritarian and PR systems.
It is more likely that in Majoritarian system, partics getting 30 percent of votes
may emerge as the ruling parties resulting in mostly two-party systems or single
party governments such as in 201O elections in the U.K., when the Conservative
Party appcared as the largest party acquiring 47 percent of seats despite holding
only 36 percent of votes while the Liberal Denocratic Party acquired 9 percent of
seats with 29 percent of votes. The Conservatives bave held power for a
prolongcd period even though they have never carned more than 40-45 percent of
total electoral votes. Majoritarian system may result in huge disparities as the
seats are not allocated in proportion of votes acquired. Also, there are higher
chances for a party with minimum two-fifth of votes to acquire the political
power which might impact the efficacy of the government and the political
system.

On the other hand, in PR system, parties get representation on seats according to

the percentage of votes acquired by then in elections. For instance, a party
getting 40 percent of votes get to represent on 40 percent of total legislative seats,
thus rcducing the possibilities of single-party rule. PRsystems usually result in
multiparty systems or in coalition goverments assuring a better representative
system and more effective political systerm. The governments thus formed are
popular govern1ments and are better at managing the pqpular mandate than those 99
 7 3 S
2 e c

Rpresentntiun
and Pulitical in the Majoritarian system where government is mostly formed by those who
Participativn have secured lesser than 50 percent of total votes.
Mixed systems ain to combine the benefits of PR and single-member plurality
systems in various ways possible. There are several arrangements in the
Majoritarian System, Proportional Representative Systemn and Mixed systems
which are designed by countries to suit their political culture. Some of them are
discussed in the following section.

7.3 MAJORITARIAN SYSTEMS

7.3.1 Single-Member Plurality Systems
Inthe single member plurality (SMP)system,the person/party holding maximum
number of votes is the winner. This system is popular in the UK, USA, Canada,
India, and some other countries which have had their political systems derived
trom the British colonial past.
ln this System, the entire area gets divided into single-member constiluencies
which are generally of equal size. The clectoral votes are cast for a single
candidate for each constituency, i.e.,each voter gets to vote for a single candidate
to govem for their constituency. This system, which is also called the First Past
the Post System, there is a higher probability of winning such election despie
getting minority votes in favour. For example, if tive candidates contesting an
elction get 32, 25, 14, 18, II votes out of total 100 votes polled, the winner is
the one who has secured the largest number of votes, 32 votes. This means that
although the majority of votes (100-3268 votes) were not favouring this
candidate, yet this candidate is declared winner because the maxinum number of
votes casted in favour of any candidate belongs to him.
This accounts foramajor drawback of the First Past thePost System as it results
in wastage of many votes. It also imeans that in this system, there is higher
possibilty of smaller political parties getting poor coverage and attention. Some
scholars hold that this also undermines the very essence of a healthy democracy
as it dilutes the impact of smaller groups and political parties in the political
system. Since, the elected candidate usually enjoys only minority support, the
legitimacy of such governments also can be questioned. Another risk associated
with this system is that it may resuit in an unaccountable government because the
winner is decided on the basis of simple majority which may not be in essence
the choice of majority of population.
Despite these limitations, there remain various advantages associated with this
systemn. The government formed in such systems claim clear mandate trom the
electorates even though it based on simple majority. This helps in avoiding any
kind of radical group or extremism from gaining strength in the political system.
Furthermore, the provision of several single-member constituencies ensures. that
every part of country gets adequate representations in_the national legislature. It
also tends to provide the voters with ample choices of candidates and varying
criteria of choosing the representatives are allowed to exist simultaneously which
in turn strengthens the democratic element.
100
7.3.2 Second-Ballot System Electoral Systems
and Elcctoral
Processes

This method has managed to address the major shortcoming of the earlier
discussed SMP system to a large extent. To ensure that the winning candidate
gets dccided not only on the basis of simplc majority but also on absolute
majority, Second-Ballot systemis used. It has been an accepted electoral system
inFrance, Chile, Austria and Russia. As followed in the SMP syste, the entire
Country is divided into several single-mnember constituencies and peopie's vote is
bascd on single-choicc out of many candidates contesting the elcction. However,
there are two rounds of voting. After the first round of voting, the second round
of voting is held between the leading two candidates who have emerged as
winners in the first round. This gives peopje the freedom to choose any candidate
in the first round, but then limits the choice to the top two contenders so that a
candidate with absolute majority emerges as winner. Because of this format, this
system is also described as Mixed Majority-Pluality' system.
This system is also followed in the USA when the two main political parties
conduct intermal clection to decide on their leadership and presidential
candidates. Rounds of voting continue to take place until any of their candidates
rcach an absolute majority.
Although this system may seem to address thc major drawback of the SMP
system, yet it fails to provide ample opportunities to the smaller parties and
individual candidates. In this system, there is higher tendency of larger partics
candidates to secure the top two positions and relegatingthe significant positions
of the third parties which may not be far bchind from the top two contenders.
This system may also encourage the candidates to opt for popularity over party
principles resulting in unstablc and corrupt contenders reaching the top two
positions. Lastly, holding eleçíion twice in any country will cost extra load on the
country's treasury as well strain the electorates' patience.
Despite these shotcomings. the Second-Ballot system also ensures that the
cleeted candidate secures consent of most of the population and is more widely
accepted. It gives the electorates also ample choices in the first round and
preferential choice inthe second round leading to maximum satisfaction of the
clectorates to the outcomes of such rigorous event. Moreover, the legitimacy of
the candidate thus elected remains unquestioned which consequently leads to a
strong and stable governance system unlike that of the SMP system.
7.3.3 Aiternative-Vote /Supplementary Vote System
This is another nethod that is used to address the criticism of SMP system
regarding the lack of absolute majority of the winning candidate. However, it is
generally used in internal election in different coustries and not as a mandatory
method to decide the national lcadership of any country. For instance, the
election in House of Representatives in Australia is decided by using the
Alternative Vote (AV) method while the election of Mayor in London, United
Kingdom is decided by the Supplenentary Vote (SV) method, which can be
described as a variant of the AV method.
101
 ipue

Representatiun
and Politica! The S and AVmethods are bascd on the sane principles anct cliffer in details. In
Participation both the systems, there are single-member constituencics, with the cleetoute
getting chance to cast multiple votes in accordance with their preference.
Electorates rank their candidates according to their choices and preferences. The
first preference is considered as the main vote, while the other ranks arc
considered as altermative or supplementary vOte. In AV system, this ranking is
given to each of the candidate contesting the alection but in the SV system, there
1s only one supplementary vote available for the electorates. This means that if 7
candidates are contesting the clection, then according to the AV system. the
electorates wvill rank the candidates as i, 2, 3, 4, 5. 6 &7; but in the SV system
the candidate will choose their topmost favourite and rank them and may give 2
to their second most favourite candidate. Thus, there are nnany alternative votes
and only one supplementary vote. The votes are counted according to the first
preterences and the candidates acquiring least votes get eliminated and their
wotes are distributed among others in order of second preference. This process is
repeated tillan absolute majority is reached by one of the candidates. There is a
slight difference betwveen the AV and the SV system in counting. Whilc in he
AV system the elimination and redistribution of votes is done muitiple tines b
in the SV system in single.round top two candidates are decided and the
subsequent round decides the winner.
The AV/SV system is detailed and complex process, but it tends to result in
Single-party or two-party system where larger parties overshadow the smaller
parties and individual candidates. Another major criticis1 that is faced by this
system is that the preferential counting may result in the same outcome as that o
SMP system wherein the winne, may have lesser first preference votes, yet they
get chosen to govern on behalf the entire population.
Nevertheiess, this system ensures that fewer votes are wasted, and a candidate's
popularity and acceptance is decided on the basis of preferential votes casted by
the voters. It is also known as Limited Vote Plan' or 'Approval oting'. It has
been adopted by several private associations in the past and also in parliamentary
elections in 1990 in various Eastern European countries (Belarus, Ukraine). The
Imajor thrust for adopting such approach has been to ensure that the winning
candidate wins absolute majority of votes or minimum 50 percent of votes.
7.3.4 Condorcet Method
Derived from the name of the founder Marquis de Condorcet, a mathemnatician
from France, this method is slightly more complex than those mentioned above.
To some extent it stands on the same principle of AV system because the voters
need to put their candidates on order of their preferences but in pair wise
comparison. For example, if there are 3 candidates X, Y, Z contesting the
clection then the voters must vote pair wise in XY, YZ and XZ. The voters
decide on to which candidate they prefer in a particular pair. The one who gets
most votes is declared as the winner.
This nmethod may seem to be more accurate and fairer in tems of deciding the
representation but due to its complex nature it has not been practiced widely.
Given the fact that it stands on the basis of pairs that are made out of contesting
102
candidatcs, it is obvious that for a country wherc large number of candidates Electoral Systcms
contest for clecctions, it will not be possible for voters to makc alI the pairs and and Eiectoral
Processes
judge accordingly.
Check Your Progress 1
Note: (i) Usc the spacc bclow for your answers
(i1) Check your answers with the ones given at the end of the unit.
1) Define the 'First-past-the-post' system?

2) List the major shortcomings of the SMP system.

3) How isAV system different from SV systen?

7.4 PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION SYSTEMS

The term Proportional Representation' is generally used as an umbrella termtor
several methods and mechanisms that aim to establish proportionality in the
ciection outcomes. The underlying principle for al! the methods remains to be the
fact that they try to match the share of seats won with the share of votes won. The
iegislative seats are shared in direct proportion to the votes acquired by the
party/candidates in the clection. Some of the well known and practised examples 3
includc the 'Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) or Additional Member System
(AMS)', 'Single-Transferable-Vote (STV) System', *Party-List System',
*Cumulative Vote System', and Slate System'.
17.4.1 Single-Transferable-Vote(STV)System
This system was first proposed by Thomas Hare and is therefore also known as
Hare Systen It is widely used in The Republic of Ireland and the UK
(Northern Ireland Assembly) as these states are made up of muiti-nenmber
COnstitucncics and the representatives elected from cach constituency vary from
ninimumthree to maximum cight. However, this does not imply that the votes
get to cast multiple votes. The voters are entitled to only one vote, but it is a
preferential voting system as practiced in AV system. Thus, the voters single vote 103
 Constituc

i n c l u d

P a r l

Representation
and Political gets transferred according to their second and third preferences and so on till a
Participation candidate is able to secure the detincd 'quota' which again isdefined in termsot
total votes acquired and total number ofseats.
In these multi-member constituencies, the winning criteriom for a candidate is
achieving the defined quota which is calculated according to the Droop formula
as mentioned below:

totei nurnber of vakid.

taltots cast in the district

1+ nunnbe of nenbers
to be elected
+|

For example, if the toal number of votes is 100 and total number of
representatives allotted are 4. then all the 4 candidates need to achieve
1+(100/1+4) = 21 votes ach in order to win the election. n case none of the
candidates get the required Droop Quota then the candidate getting least number
of votes get eliminated and his votes get
transferred according to their second
preferences. This process is repeated untíl ali the required 4 candidates get 21
Votes each. In other case, if the candidate surpasses the
Droop quota, then all the
excess votes acquired by that very candidate also get
with the next preference. transferred in accórdance
The voters cast single vote, but it gets
transferred multiple times as per the
preferences mentioned, hence, this system is known as
Vote (STV)system'. Thissystem is used in Rajya Sabha Single-Transferrable
each state assembly works as one multi-member elections in India where
one transferable vote each. Australian Senate, constituency, and the MLAS get
Parliament of Malta and Íreland
have also adopted this system.
This system has managed to reduce the wastage' of votes and unlike the
SMP
system, this system provides for higher possibilities of proportional
representation. All the çandidates are judged and elected on equal criteria and
renain at par with each other in representiig the constituency, which in turn
ensures better and more balanccd governance systemn. It also provides the voters,
ample choices to rank their candidates and get varied combination of
representatives, and reduces the possibìlity of single-party dominance in the
political system.
Although this system, overcomes many limitations of the Majoritarian methods,
it has its own shortcomings. Multi-member constituencies may result in abrupt
combinations of representatives which may hamper smooth and speedy decision
making capabilities leading to an inefficient governance system. Moreover, all
candidates hold same value and position even though sone of them might be
more widely accepted and popular than the others. Hence, public
liking/popularity/acceptance also gets compromised to a certain extent as all the
winners hold equal importance.
7.4.2 Party-List System
As the name suggests, this systenn is based on voting done for party rather than
104 the candidates. The Party-List system is followed In both single-member
 COnstitucncics as wcll_ asmulti-ucmber constitucncics. Somc of thc cxaiplcs Elcctoral Systems
and Electoral
Include states of Europcan Union (Belgiunn, Luxembourg); also the EurOpcan ProcSses
Parliament gets elected following this method. Apart fromn these, it is also
followcd in those countries where the entire country is considered as a Silgle
cOnsitucncy such as Isracl, and Switzerland.
Votes arc casted in favour of parties and not candidates. HOwever, the list systcm
IS SUCh that the voter is well aware of all the candidates contesting the electio1 as
harties ist their candidates in order of the preferences, with first rank being
gven to the highest position. Hence, each of the party in the country prepares a
list which declares the candidates position if they get elected to power. Voters
Cast thejr votes in favOur of their preferred party after knowing the list of the
candidales. Parties share the seats in direct proportion with the votes acquired.
For instance, if aparty achieves 40 percent of votes, then it gets to represent 40
percent of seats which gets filled by the list of candidates prepared by the party
beforchand. In Switzerland this system has been slightly modified where the
Voters get a blank vote, and they can either vote for aparty-list or they can create
their own hybrid-list which consists of candidates from differcnt party-lists.
Party-list system can be furtiher classified in two forms: Open-list systems and
closed-list systes. The forer is an arrangenent wherc voters cast their yote for
both the party and the candidate within the party. So, they have their say_in
deternining wiho in the party-list should be chosen for the said position. For
example, in Filand, the voters cast two votes- one for the party and other for the
candidatc within that Party.
Ciosed-list systen, on the other hand, does not give any choice to the voter in
cOntex of the candidate. The list is prepared by the party and presented to the
clectorate. In Israçl which has adopted this system, voters accept the list of
candidates nominated by the party and cast their vote in favour of tlhe party.
Belgiunn follows the mid-way between the closed-list and the open-list system,
wherein, the voter gets to choose either the list provided by the party or any
individual candidate and where lower placedcandidate can get higher position in
case, he/she succeeds in acquiring the specified minimum number of preferential
Votcs.

Advocates of Party-list systen hai! it as the purest form of proportional

representation as it assures fair chance to both small and big parties. Party-List
systeim has also fared well terms of inclusion of
smaller/seglected/marginalized sections of society such as WOmen and
minorities. The voter gets an idea before voting as to which party has more
inclusive list andcovers all sections of the society and which kind of government
they will get if choosing any party. This resuits in a more inclusive society which
restson higher possibilities of negotiations, bargain, and consensus.
However, the Party List systen runs the risk of having an unstable, fragmented,
and weak goverment. As the voters vote for party, theËr link with the candidates
may not be as strong as it tends to be in systems which allow voting forthicir
candidate directly. A Iso there remains a chance where a certaìn candidate may
have influential position in the party but lack mass appeal, leading to apossible
disaffection after the leader is elected. Moreover, candidates may also get into 105
 Representation
and Politica! lunta1r practices to get into the list and public service might get masked by grec
Partivipation Tor power, leading towards a corrupt systcm of gOYeINance.

7.5 MIXED ELECTORAL SYSTEMS

1his category includes systems that combine elements of each of the
first twO
Ypes to produce a pattern somewhat in between, that is, with some
elements oi
mjoritarian and some of proportionality but not falling completely under either
of them.

7.5.1 Mixed-Member Proportional or Additional Member System

By combining the SMP system and the
Member Proportional (MMP) or AdditionalParty-list system, we get the MiNed
Member (AM) system. This implies
that some seats get filled by SMP
method while rest of the seats are filled
the Party-List system. A good using
example of
where 50 percent of the seats are flled by this arrangement in play is in Germany
member constituencies. A ew other statesSMP in
system particularly in he sinyle
Wales have adopted MMP system Europe, ike Italy, Scotland, and
where more than 50 percent of seats are
allotted as per the SMP system and rest are
filled using Party-list systen.
In this system, the voters are
other for the party. The basisentitled
to two votes each- One for the
for this hybrid system is tO candidate and
between the constituency representative and maintain the differcnce
former gets chosen by the people directly ministerial positions. While the
through
elected in a more proportional manner withn the the SMP system, the later is
party getting its due
ilnportance
Further,theoters also getthechoice of
electing thcir constitucney
representative
from a different party and the government from a difterent one,
which leads to an efficient *checks and
balance' systen in place.
7.5.2 Semi-Proportional Method
This is another variation in the
combination of majoritarin method and the
proportiona! representation method. A certain variation in this system is lvllowd
in New Zealand and India where
some arrangements is made to ensure the
involvement of ethnic minorities and backward classes in the political syste1 of
the respective country. The Maori districts in
New Zealand are exclusively
confined to people who are descents of Maori com1munity while in India, ther
are certain areas from which only Scheduled Castes and
Contest the election, but the same criteria do not apply for Scheduled Tribes can
voters. Voters
category and castes can ote but contesting candidates must be from SCtrom all
or ST
category. In a sense, this is more of an arrangement to reserve some seats
for a
special class rather than true form of proportional
representation.
7.5.3 Cumulative Vote System
Another variation of scmi-proportional method can be sccn in Cumulative vote
system in which voters are entitied for multiple votes in nulti-member
Constituencies. The number of members to be elected to represent aconstituency
106
equals the number of votes casted by every voter. Thus, if there are 5 men1bers to
 lectoralSystem
be clectedtrom a single constitucncy, then cach voter gets to cast 5 votcs. Here n d Electoral
the voter is free to cast all tlhe votestoa single candidate, or one vote to cach of ProceNNCN

those contesting candidates or divide the votes among the candidates as per
his/her discretion. The top ive candidates are considered as winner. Hence,
Counting wisc this follows the SMP systen, as thc cumulative votes matter in
tinal results.

7.5.4 Sate System

This system is cxclusively used in USA during the election of President's
Elcctoral College. It is closcly related to Party-List system with the only
ditterence being the list prepared byparty is called as 'Slate'. The voters get the
'slates' from both the Demoeratic and the Republican Party and vote for thcir
preferred slate i.e., they vote for an entire list of candidates and not any one
candidate in particular. The slate, which acquires 51 percent of votes, wins the
cntirc statc i.c., thc party to which the slate belongs gets to reprcscnt the ontire
Nate. This aspeet is somewhat like the first-past-the-post" system however. the
major ditterence remains the criteria of carning SI percent of total votes to win
&the clection. A lso, in he first-past-the-post' system, the constituencies arc
" represented by single candidate while in the 'slate system" the constituencies are
represented by more than onc member and the party winning 51percent votes
gets to appoint its members listed as representatives. Hence, the constituencies
are represented by multiple members belonging to onc party.
Check Your Progress 2 oy

Note: i) LUse the space given below for your answers.

ii) Chcck your answers with the one givcn at thc cnd ofUnit.
I) What are the nnajor drawbacks in the PR systen?

2) Describe the Single-Translerable Votce system.

3) What is Party-List system?

107
Representation COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF
and Political 7.6
Participation ELECTORAL PROCESSES
emnergng
Ihe signiticance of electora! processes cannot be denied in the wake of
democratic societies all around the world. An electora! system does n0t only set
rules for election in a country, but also plays erucial role in shaping the party
system and impacting the political system of the country. Hence, it becomes
imperative for political parties, in retum, to influence and alter the electoral
systenn as per their advantage.
Electoral systems and processes vary across time and space and party politics act
as a catalyst for such changes and variations. Both thc majoritarian and the PR
systems have been tried, altered and replaced by countries across the world in
qitferent times. Many countries have tried to alter the elections by simple shifting
from one kind of electoral system to another or by opting for a combination of
two different electoral systems. A classic example in hand is France, which has
changed its electoral systems more frequently than others. The parliamentary
elections were heldËaccording to second-ballot system till 1985, when it was
replaced by Party-List system under the intuence of the Socialist Party which
controlled the national assembly in the 1980s and 1990s. A major factor driving
such change was derived from the hitherto President Mitterrand's strong desire to
strengthen Socialist representation in the National Assembly. Another example of
changes in electorai system can be noted in case of United Kingdom which has
seen changes in the electoral systems of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland
from single-member plurality (SMP) to proportional methods with the SMP
system retained in general etections. This is said to be the result of an active
interest of Labour Party in opposition towards electoral reforms particularly for
devolved bodies. Nevw Zealand has also shifted its electoral systerm from SMP to
PR system since 1993. Italy has also experimented by replacing its erstwhile
party-Iist system with the MMPÍAM systemand returning to the party-list system
in 2003 (Haywood 2013: 207}.
An electoral process can be assessed in context of following twO aspects: firstly,
the extent to which the electoral process is able to deliver tair and justitied
representation, and secodly, the impact it creates on the efficiency of the
government.

Speaking of the Majoritarjan methods, the criteria of delivering fair and justitied
representation remains unfealised as it is driven by popular preference which may
or may not represent the society in its truest form. The general criticism
associated with the majoritarian methods is that it does not stand true to the
electoral strength as achieving 'simple majority' is the only criteria to win an
election. There is a tendency for the reiatively smaller parties to be sidelinedin
such arrangement. This is very well exemplified in the 2014 General Elections in
India, where the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) has swept the elections and formmed
a majoritarian government despite getting merely 31 percent of votes in its
favour.

In this context, the PR system seems to be much nore efficient in delivering fair
108 and justified representation of the masses. Here, we need to keep in mind that an
 Electoral Sycms
cssential function of an clcctoral systen1 is not only to facilitate the process of nd Elcctoral
ProceAsCN
govemnment fomation but also in delivering a strong and stablc governance
system. The PR systems seem to be failing on this as it generally results in
coalition governments which may be not as stable and strong as single-party
gOvemment scems to be. It has becn noticcd that the coalition governMents
fomed in PR systems facc cqual criticism and challcnges post-clcction despite
claiming a clear electoral strength in the elections. The splhere of influence
shrinks and the ability to act and deliver on public pronmises is equally hampered
in PR systcms due to thc formation of coalition govcrnmcnts.
Advocates of PR systems identify the good governance in terns of having
systems as One
maximum civil support and obedience. They justify the PR
system
delivering maximum possible efficient governance system as it is the only even
governnent. So
which takes ´atbsolute majority' as a criterion for forming a
assures that all its members and
if there is a coalition government in place, it
possible. Consensus, debate
ministcrs cnjoy popular support in its purcst form
as these not only
and discussion are essence of a highly efficient government
and intercsts making
protect but also ensure coexistence of diverse public opinion
majority of its citizens content with the government.

7.7 LET US SUM UP

to the formation and
Electoral processes are of great significant when it cojmes
maintenance of democratic socictics. Not only they shape the clection outcomes,
systems, impact political culture and
but also influence the structure of party
turn, thc electoral processes also get
government formation in any country. In
affected by the social and political structure ofa country. Different sct-ups call
combination. The study of
for varying electoral systems either solely or in
varying range of electoral systems can be classified in twO major categories:
Majoritarian systems and Proportional Representation Systems.
The most opted majoritarian method is 'Singlc-nember Plurality: , also called as
single
the first-past-the-post system'. It is followed in countries which have
member constituencies and thc candidate securing maximum number of votes is
declarcd as winner. There are no restrictions on minimunn nunber of votes which
is required for winning the election. Simple majority of votes is the only criteria.
This method is often criticised on the grounds of 'wasting' a large nunnber of
votes by considering only simple majority. Soe other methods include Second
Ballot System, Alternative Vote (AV) Supplementary Vote (SV) system, and
Condorcet Method offer an alternative.

. The Second category of Electoral systes is known as Proportional

8 Representation (PR) Systems which includes avarying range of methods such as
Single-Transferable-Vote (STV) Systen, Party-List System, Mixed-Member
Proportional (MMP) or Additional Member (AM) systerm, Semi-Proportional
Method, Cumulative Vote System, and Slate System. These methods are morc
representative as they followv proportionality rule which implies that the scats are
allotted in accordance with the votes acquired.

109
Representation
and Political The majoritarian nethods usually result in single-party governments and two
Participation party systems which at times do mask up thc cfforts of the third partics or smaller
groups and parties. The PR systems usually operate in a multi-party system iand
tend to yield coalitiongovernments. Both the systems have their advantages and
disadvantages. Whilc the former yields strong and stable governments with lesser
possibilities of mid-term change in governments, the latter is more concerned
with the essence of democracy to be measured in terms of consensus, discussion
d negotiations which can happen in case of coalition governments only. in
context of disadvantages, the majoritarian methods run the risk of facing public
disapproval of the govcrnments as it is based on 'simplc majority' which may go
against the public at large. On the other hand, the PR systems are too complicated
and time taking, and may not be teasible for large and poor countries because
multiple rounds of voting seem to be an expensive affair.
7.8 REFERENCES
Haywood, Andrew .(2013).Politics. London:Palgrave Macmillan.
Krupaviius, Isoda, Vaianoras. (2013).Jntroduction to
Didactical Guideline. Kaunas: Vytautas Magnus University.Comparative Politics:
Rae D. W. (1971). The Pþlitical Consequences of Electoral Laws. New
CT: Yale University Press. Huven.
Siaroff Alan. (2013). Comparing Political Regimes: AThematic
Comparative Politics. Carnada: University of Toronto Press. Introduction to
Clark, William Roberts;Golder, Matt; Golder,
SonaNadenichek. (2013).
Prìnciples of Comparative Politics. USA: Sage Publications.
7.9 ANSWERS TOCHECK YOUR PROGRESS
EXERCISES
Check Your Progress 1
1) The first-past-the-post system refers to an
candidates do not need to pass a minimum arrangement where the contesting
threshold of votes to be elected:
instead, they need a simple majority, that is, one more vote than
their closest
rival. In this system the government is formed by the
have managed to win maximum constituencies
party whose candidates
irrespective of their share of the
popular vote.
2) A major shortcoming of the SMP
systems is thcir tendency to give a majority
of seats to one party which is also known as a
"manufactured majority'". By
limiting the representation to bigger parties, this system can marginalise smaller
parties in the political system.
3) In both the systems, there are
single-member constituencies, but the electorates
get to cast multiple votes in accordance with their
preterence. In AVsystem,
ranking is given to each of the candidate contesting the eleetion but in the this
SV
110
system, there is only one supplementary vote available tor the electorates.
 Elcctoral Systcms
Check Your Progress 2 and Eiectora!
Prcesses S

)The multiple voting involved in PR system creates extra expenditure from the
CoUntry. Further, the process may be n0re time consuming. It usually results in
coalition governments which arc considercd weak and lcss efficient
1n

cOmparIson to the single-party governments yielded by majoritarian methods.

cast
2) Single-Transferable Vote systen is an arrangement where the voters
preferential votes for individual candidates by giving them ranks as per their
discretion.
the political partics
3) AParty-List system refers to an arrangement wherein
the number of seats to be
prepare a list of candidates in accordance with
well as decide on the
contested. Voters are given a choice to choose the party as
list of
ranking/preferences of candidates within the party-list. Alternately, the
candidates is decided by the party and the voters vote for the party list.

UNIV

111