Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-13T11:43:28.420Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Redistricting Local Governments in England: Rules, Procedures, and Electoral Outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2021

Colin Rallings ,
Michael Thrasher ,
Ron Johnston  and
James Downe
Colin Rallings
Affiliation:
University of Plymouth
Michael Thrasher
Affiliation:
University of Plymouth
Ron Johnston
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
James Downe
Affiliation:
Cardiff Business School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Commission-based process of local government electoral redistricting in England seeks to balance the tensions between both neutral and party political and mathematic and organic approaches to boundary drawing. We evaluate the success of this process by assessing the impact of redistricting on electoral equality and the strength of the political parties in each local authority. On one hand, the Commission appears to be effective in achieving vote equality by reducing the variability between electoral units in the ratio of electors to councillors. On the other hand, the way that submissions are made to the Commission, together with aspects of social and electoral geography over which it has no influence, can allow one party to receive more electoral benefit than another from redistricting.

Type
Research Article
Information
State Politics & Policy Quarterly , Volume 4 , Issue 4 , Winter 2004 , pp. 470 - 490
Copyright
Copyright © Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

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.)

References

Brookes, R. H. 1960. “The Analysis of Distorted Representation in Two-Party, Single-Member Elections.” Political Science 12:158–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, G. W., and Katz, J. N.. 2002. Elbridge Gerry's Salamander. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gronke, P., and Wilson, J. M.. 1999. “Competing Redistricting Plans as Evidence of Political Motives: The North Carolina Case.” American Politics Quarterly 27:147–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R. J. 1999. “Geography, Fairness and Liberal Democracy.” In Geography and Ethics: Journeys in a Moral Terrain, eds. Proctor, J. D. and Smith, D. M.. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johnston, R. J., Pattie, C. J., Dorling, D. F. L., and Rossiter, D. J.. 2001. From Votes to Seats: The Operation of the UK Electoral System since 1945. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, R. J., Pattie, C. J., and Rossiter, D. J.. 1997. “The Organic or the Arithmetic: Independent Commissions and the Redrawing of the UK's Administrative Maps.” Regional Studies 31:337–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R. J., Rossiter, D. J., and Pattie, C. J.. 1999. “Integrating and Decomposing the Sources of Partisan Bias: Brookes' Method and the Impact of Redistricting in Great Britain.” Electoral Studies 18:367–78 (addendum 649-50).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R. J., Rossiter, D. J., Pattie, C. J., and Dorling, D. F. L.. 2002a. “Labour Electoral Landslides and the Changing Efficiency of Voting Distributions.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS27:336–61.Google Scholar
Johnston, R. J., Rossiter, D. J., Pattie, C. J., and Dorling, D. F. L.. 2002b. “Distortion Magnified: New Labour and the British Electoral System, 1950-2001.” In British Elections and Parties Review Volume 12: The 2001 General Election, eds. Bennie, L., Rallings, C., Tonge, J., and Webb, P.. London: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. J., Pattie, C. J., and Rossiter, D. J.. 1997. “The Organic or the Arithmetic: Independent Commissions and the Redrawing of the UK's Administrative Maps.” Regional Studies 31:337–49.Google Scholar
Kousser, J. M. 1996. “Estimating the Partisan Consequences of Redistricting Plans—Simply.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 21:521–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kousser, J. M. 1998. “Reapportionment Wars: Party, Race and Redistricting in California, 1971-1992.” In Race and Redistricting in the 1990s, ed. Grofman, B.. New York: Agathon Press.Google Scholar
Local Government Boundary Commission. 1992. Final Report 1971-92. London: LGBC.Google Scholar
Local Government Commission for England. 1997. Staff Manual. London: LGCE.Google Scholar
Local Government Commission for England. 1999. London Borough of Bexley Draft Recommendations. London: LGCE.Google Scholar
Local Government Commission for England. 2000. Corporate Plan 2000/2001. London: LGCE.Google Scholar
Local Government Commission for England. 2001. Periodic Electoral Reviews: Guidance and Procedural Advice for Local Authorities and Interested Parties. 5th ed. London: LGCE.Google Scholar
Loosemore, J., and Hanby, V.. 1979. “The Theoretical Limits of Maximum Distortion.” British Journal of Political Science 1:467–77.Google Scholar
Rallings, C., Thrasher, M., and Downe, J.. 2002. One Vote, One Value. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Rossiter, D. J., Johnston, R. J., and Pattie, C. J.. 1997a. “Estimating the Partisan Impact of Redistricting in Britain.” British Journal of Political Science 27:319–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossiter, D. J., Johnston, R. J., and Pattie, C. J.. 1997b. “Redistricting and Electoral Bias in Great Britain.” British Journal of Political Science 27:466–72.Google Scholar
Rossiter, D. J., Johnston, R. J., and Pattie, C. J.. 1999. The Boundary Commissions: Redrawing the UK's Map of Parliamentary Constituencies. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Thrasher, M., Johnston, R. J., and Rallings, C.. 2004. “Magnifying the Voters' Preferences: Votes, Seats and Bias in Elections to Birmingham's City Council during the Twentieth Century.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 35:69–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar