Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-8hm5d Total loading time: 0.29 Render date: 2022-05-25T12:25:24.219Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

The Ethnic Implications of Preferential Voting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2017

Abstract

Around the turn of the century, political developments in Northern Ireland, Fiji and Papua New Guinea encouraged claims that preferential voting systems could steer polities in the direction of ‘moderate’ multi-ethnic government. Sixteen years later, we have a longer time period and larger volume of data to reassess these verdicts. This article investigates ballot transfer and party vote–seat share patterns in the seven deeply divided polities with some experience of preferential voting for legislative elections or direct presidential elections (Northern Ireland, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Estonia, Sri Lanka, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Southern Rhodesia). We find little support for centripetalist claims that such systems encourage ‘moderate’ parties. We argue that where district magnitude is low, where voters are required to rank preferences and where ticket voting prevails, departures from vote–seat proportionality may favour ‘moderate’ parties, but such heavily engineered systems may simply advantage the larger parties or yield erratic outcomes.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published by Government and Opposition Limited and Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

John Coakley is a Professor in the School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics, Queen’s University Belfast, and Professor Emeritus, University College Dublin. Contact email: j.coakley@qub.ac.uk.

John Fraenkel is a Professor in the School of History, Philosophy, Political Science and International Relations, Victoria University of Wellington. Contact email: jon.fraenkel@vuw.ac.nz.

References

ARK (2016), Northern Ireland Election Results, www.ark.ac.uk/elections/.Google Scholar
Barkan, J. (1995), ‘Elections in Agrarian Societies’, Journal of Democracy, 6(4): 106116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belloni, R. (2004), ‘Peacebuilding and Consociational Electoral Engineering in Bosnia and Herzegovina’, International Peacekeeping, 11(2): 334353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belloni, R. (2007), State Building and International Intervention in Bosnia (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
Bose, S. (2002), Bosnia after Dayton: Nationalist Partition and International Intervention (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Chandra, K. (2005), ‘Ethnic Parties and Democratic Stability’, Perspectives on Politics, 3(2): 235252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coakley, J. (2009), ‘The Political Consequences of the Electoral System in Northern Ireland’, Irish Political Studies, 24(3): 253284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnen, S. (1998), ‘Weakness and Strength – State, Society and Order in Papua New Guinea’, in P. Dauvergne (ed.), Weak and Strong States in Asia-Pacific Societies (London: Allen and Unwin): 38–59.Google Scholar
Elliott, S. (1973), Northern Ireland Parliamentary Election Results 1921–1972 (Chichester: Political Reference Publications).Google Scholar
Elliott, S. and Wilford, R.A. (1983), The 1982 Northern Ireland Assembly Election (Glasgow: Centre for the Study of Public Policy, University of Strathclyde).Google Scholar
Endersby, J.W. and Towle, M.J. (2014), ‘Making Wasted Votes Count: Turnout, Transfers, And Preferential Voting in Practice’, Electoral Studies, 33(1): 144152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, G. and O’Leary, B. (2000), ‘Northern Irish Voters and the British--Irish Agreement: Foundations of a Stable Consociational Settlement?’, Political Quarterly, 71(1): 78101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiji Elections Office (1999), Elections ’99: Results by the Count (Suva: Government Printer).Google Scholar
Fiji Elections Office (2001), General Elections 2001: Results by the Count (Suva: Government Printer).Google Scholar
Fiji Elections Office (2006), Election Results by the Count, 2006 (Suva: Government Printer).Google Scholar
Fraenkel, J. (2001), ‘The Alternative Vote System in Fiji: Electoral Engineering or Ballot-rigging?’, Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, 39(1): 131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. (2015a), ‘The Remorseless Power of Incumbency in Fiji’s September 2014 Election’, Round Table, 104(2): 151164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. (2015b), ‘“Equal Rights for Every Civilized Man South of the Zambesi”: Electoral Engineering in Southern Rhodesia 1957–65’, Journal of Southern African Studies, 41(6): 11671180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. and Grofman, B. (2004), ‘A Neo-Downsian Model of the Alternative Vote as a Mechanism for Mitigating Ethnic Conflict in Plural Societies’, Public Choice, 121(3–4): 487506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. and Grofman, B. (2006a), ‘Does the Alternative Vote Foster Moderation in Ethnically Divided Societies? The Case of Fiji’, Comparative Political Studies, 39(5): 623651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. and Grofman, B. (2006b), ‘The Failure of the Alternative Vote as a Tool for Ethnic Moderation in Fiji: A Rejoinder to Horowitz’, Comparative Political Studies, 39(5): 663666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. and Grofman, B. (2007), ‘The Merits of Neo-Downsian Modelling of the Alternative Vote: A Reply to Horowitz’, Public Choice, 133(1–2): 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. and Grofman, B. (2014), ‘The Borda Count and its Real World Alternatives: Comparing Scoring Rules in Nauru and Slovenia’, Australian Journal of Political Science, 49(2): 186205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, M. (1978), ‘Party Solidarity, Exclusivity and Inter-Party Relationships in Ireland, 1922–1977: The Evidence of Transfers’, Economic and Social Review, 10(1): 122.Google Scholar
Guelke, A. (2012), Politics in Deeply Divided Societies (Cambridge: Polity).Google Scholar
Hirczy de Miño, W. and Lane, J.-E. (1996), ‘STV in Malta: Some Surprises’, Representation, 34(1): 2128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (1985), Ethnic Groups in Conflict (Berkeley: University of California Press).Google Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (1989), ‘Incentives and Behaviour in the Ethnic Politics of Sri Lanka and Malaysia’, Third World Quarterly, 10(4): 1835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (1991), A Democratic South Africa? Constitutional Engineering in a Divided Society (Berkeley: University of California Press).Google Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (2001), ‘The Northern Ireland Agreement: Clear, Consociational and Risky’, in J. McGarry (ed.), Northern Ireland and the Divided World: Post-Agreement Northern Ireland in Comparative Perspective (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 109136.Google Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (2002a), ‘Constitutional Design: Proposals Versus Processes’, in A. Reynolds (ed.), The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 1536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (2002b), ‘Explaining the Northern Ireland Agreement: The Sources of an Unlikely Constitutional Consensus’, British Journal of Political Science, 32(2): 193220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (2004), ‘The Alternative Vote and Ethnic Moderation: A Reply to Fraenkel and Grofman’, Public Choice, 121(3–4): 507516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (2006), ‘Strategy Takes a Holiday: Fraenkel and Grofman on the Alternative Vote’, Comparative Political Studies, 39(5): 652662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICG (International Crisis Group) (1998), ‘Changing the Logic of Bosnian Politics’, ICG Discussion Paper on Electoral Reform, 10 March.Google Scholar
Jansen, H. (2004), ‘The Political Consequences of the Alternative Vote: Lessons from Western Canada’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 37(3): 647669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ketan, J. (2004), The Name Must Not Go Down; Political Competition and State–Society Relations in Mount Hagen, Papua New Guinea (Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies, USP).Google Scholar
Lakeman, E. (1955), Voting in Democracies: A Study of Majority and Proportional Electoral Systems (London: Faber).Google Scholar
Laponce, J. (1957), ‘The Protection of Minorities by the Electoral System’, Western Political Quarterly, 10(2): 318339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lardeyret, G. (1991), ‘The Problem with PR’, Journal of Democracy, 2: 3035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, R.J., Elliott, S. and Laver, M.J. (1975), The Northern Ireland General Elections of 1973, Cmnd 5851 (London: HMSO).Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (1977), Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration (New Haven: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (1985), ‘Power-Sharing in South Africa’, Policy Papers in International Affairs, 24 (Berkeley: Institute of International Studies, University of California).Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (1991), ‘The Alternative Vote: A Realistic Alternative for South Africa?’, Politikon, 18(2): 91101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, W.J.M. (1954), ‘Representation in Plural Societies’, Political Studies, 2(1): 5469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manning, C. and Antić, M. (2003), ‘Lessons from Bosnia and Herzegovina: The Limits of Electoral Engineering’, Journal of Democracy, 14(3): 4559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansergh, N. (1936), The Government of Northern Ireland: A Study in Devolution (London: George Allen and Unwin).Google Scholar
May, R. (2006), ‘Political Parties in Papua New Guinea’, in R. Rich, L. Hambly and M. Morgan (eds), Political Parties in the Pacific Islands (Canberra: Pandanus): 83102.Google Scholar
May, R.J., Wheen, K. and Haley, N. (2011), ‘Assessing the Shift to Limited Preferential Voting’, in R.J. May, R. Anere, N. Haley and K. Wheen (eds), Election 2007: The Shift to Limited Preferential Voting in Papua New Guinea (Port Moresby: National Research Institute (PNG) and Canberra: State, Society and Governance in Melanesia Program, Australian National University): 193205.Google Scholar
McAllister, I. (1975), ‘The 1975 Northern Ireland Convention Election’, University of Strathclyde Occasional Paper 14 (Glasgow: Survey Research Centre).Google Scholar
McGarry, J. and O’Leary, B. (2006), ‘Consociational Theory, Northern Ireland’s Conflict, and its Agreement, Part 2: What Critics of Consociationalism Can Learn from Northern Ireland’, Government and Opposition: An International Journal of Comparative Politics, 41(2): 249277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGarry, J. and O’Leary, B. (2009), ‘Power Shared after the Deaths of Thousands’, in R. Taylor (ed.), Consociational Theory: McGarry and O’Leary and the Northern Ireland Conflict (London: Routledge): 1584.Google Scholar
Mietzner, M. (2008), ‘Comparing Indonesia’s Party Systems of the 1950s and the Post-Suharto Era: From Centrifugal to Centripetal Inter-Party Competition’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 39(3): 431453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, P. (2014), ‘The Single Transferable Vote and Ethnic Conflict: The Evidence from Northern Ireland, 1982–2007’, Electoral Studies, 33(1): 246257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, P., Evans, G. and O’Leary, B. (2009), ‘Extremist Outbidding in Ethnic Party Systems is Not Inevitable: Tribune Parties in Northern Ireland’, Political Studies, 57(2): 397421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palley, C. (1978), Constitutional Law and Minorities (London: Minority Rights Group), (Report no. 36).Google Scholar
Papua New Guinea Electoral Office (1973), Report of the Chief Electoral Officer on the 1972 House of Assembly General Election (Port Moresby: Government Printer).Google Scholar
Passmore, G.C. and Mitchell, M.T. (1963), Sourcebook of Parliamentary Elections and Referenda in Southern Rhodesia, 18981962 (Salisbury: Department of Government, University College of Rhodesia and Nyasaland).Google Scholar
Punnett, R.M. (1987), ‘The Alternative Vote with Optional Use of Preferences: Some Irish Lessons for Britain and Australia’, Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, 25(1): 2643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly, B. (2001), Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly, B. (2002), ‘Back to the Future? The Political Consequences of Electoral Reform in Papua New Guinea’, Journal of Pacific History, 37(2): 239253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly, B. and Reynolds, A. (2000), Electoral Systems and Conflict in Divided Societies (Washington, DC: National Academy Press).Google Scholar
Reynolds, A. (1995), ‘Constitutional Engineering in South Africa’, Journal of Democracy, 6(1): 8699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, A., Reilly, B. and Ellis, A. with others (2006), Electoral System Design: The New International IDEA Handbook (Stockholm: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance).Google Scholar
Salamey, I. and Pearson, F. (2005), ‘The Crisis of Federalism and Electoral Strategies in Iraq’, International Studies Perspectives, 6(2): 190207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, G. (1968), ‘Political Development and Political Engineering’, in J.D. Montgomery and A.O. Hirschman (eds), Public Policy, Vol. 17 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press) 261298.Google Scholar
Sharman, C., Sayers, A.M. and Miragliotta, N. (2002), ‘Trading Party Preferences: The Australian Experience of Preferential Voting’, Electoral Studies, 21(4): 543560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Standish, B. (1978), ‘The “Big Man” Model Reconsidered: Power and Stratification in Chimbu’, Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research Discussion Paper 22 (Boroko, Papua New Guinea): 1–43.Google Scholar
Stone, D. (1976), ‘The Political Turning Point: The Birth of the National Coalition Government’, in D. Stone (ed.), Prelude to Self-Government: Electoral Politics in Papua New Guinea 1972 (Canberra: Australian National University): 529538.Google Scholar
Strathern, A. (1993), ‘Violence and Political Change in Papua New Guinea’, Pacific Studies, 16(4): 4160.Google Scholar
Taagepera, R. (1990), ‘The Baltic States’, Electoral Studies, 9(4): 303311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taagepera, R. (1996), ‘STV in Transitional Estonia’, Representation, 34(1): 2936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Territory of Papua and New Guinea (1964), Statistical Returns Showing the Voting Within Each Open and Special Electorate in Relation to the General Election for the House of Assembly (Port Moresby: Government Printer).Google Scholar
Territory of Papua and New Guinea (1968), Report of the Chief Electoral Officer on the House of Assembly Election, 1968 (Port Moresby: Government Printer).Google Scholar
Wilford, R. (2010), ‘Northern Ireland: The Politics of Constraint’, Parliamentary Affairs, 63(1): 134155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimmer, A. (2003–4), ‘Democracy and Ethno-religious Conflict in Iraq’, Survival, 45(4): 111134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Ethnic Implications of Preferential Voting
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Ethnic Implications of Preferential Voting
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Ethnic Implications of Preferential Voting
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *