Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T14:01:12.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Centripetal incentives and political engineering in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Benjamin Reilly
Affiliation:
Australian National University, Canberra
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Australia is a particularly interesting case of centripetalism at work for three reasons. First, the Australian experience represents by the far the best-established and longest-running example of preferential voting in the world today, with all three of the major preferential electoral systems (AV, SV and STV) having been used for elections in various jurisdictions in Australia. All three systems were also developed or substantially refined in Australia, and the Australian development of electoral institutions therefore represents one of the more distinctive national contributions to institutional design (McLean 1996, 369). Having been a feature of Australian politics since the early years of last century, preferential voting has become an embedded and well-institutionalised factor of Australian elections. Since 1963, all state, territory and federal jurisdictions have utilised preferential voting of one sort or another. The Australian experience thus enables us to examine the effects of preferential voting upon political competition over a long period in a stable political environment.

The second distinctive feature of Australia for investigation of divided societies is its combination of high degrees of ethnic diversity with low levels of inter-ethnic conflict. Australia has one of the world's most ethnically diverse populations, with approximately 40 per cent of the population being overseas-born or the offspring of overseas born immigrants, most of whom come from non-English speaking countries in southern Europe, the Middle East and Asia. According to one source, ‘Australia has the highest proportion of foreign born in the population of any advanced industrial democracy, with the possible exception of Israel’ (Bowler et al. 1996, 468).

Type
Chapter
Information
Democracy in Divided Societies
Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management
, pp. 42 - 57
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2001

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.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book 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.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

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

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

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

Available formats
×