Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T02:37:12.103Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SUL GRADO DI PROPORZIONALITÀ DI ALCUNE FORMULE ELETTORALI

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 June 2016

Arend Lijphart
Get access

Introduzione

Nella letteratura sui sistemi elettorali è ben consolidata l'idea che la rappresentanza proporzionale (R.P.) abbia in genere maggior successo nel raggiungere il suo obiettivo principale — una trasformazione ragionevolmente proporzionale dei voti in seggi — soprattutto rispetto alle formule maggioritarie a uno o due turni. Una delle «proposizioni differenziali» di Douglas W. Rae è che «le formule di rappresentanza proporzionale tendono a distribuire i seggi in modo più proporzionale delle formule maggioritarie». È altrettanto noto che le diverse formule di R.P. non sono proporzionali nella stessa misura, ma gli studiosi sono in disaccordo su quali di esse siano più proporzionali e quali meno.

Type
Note
Information
Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , August 1983 , pp. 295 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © Società Italiana di Scienza Politica 

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

1 Rae, D.W., The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1971, p. 16.Google Scholar

2 Blondel, J., An Introduction to Comparative Government, London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1969, pp. 186–191.Google Scholar

3 Ibidem, p. 191.Google Scholar

4 Loosemore, J. e Honby, V.J., The Theoretical Limits of Maximum Distortion: Some Analytic Expression for Electoral Systems , in «British Journal of Political Science», I (1971), pp. 467–477.Google Scholar

5 Rae, , op. cit. , p. 105.Google Scholar

6 Balinski, M.L. e Young, H.P., The Webster Method of Apportionment , in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, LXXVII (1980), pp. 1–4.Google Scholar

7 Vedi Van den Bergh, G., Unity in Diversity: A Systematic Critical Analysis of All Electoral Systems, London, Batsford, 1955, pp. 24–26; MacKenzie, W.J.M., Free Elections: An Elementary Textbook, London, Allen & Urwin, 1958, pp. 78–80; La Keman, E., How Democracies Vote: A Study of Electoral Systems, London, Faber and Faber, 1974, pp. 93–97; Berrington, H., Summary of Electoral Systems and Formulae , in Finer, S.E., (ed.), Adversary Politics and Electoral Reform, London, Anthony Wigram, 1975, pp. 366–368; Nohlen, D., Wahlsysteme der Welt. Daten und Analysen; Ein Handbuch, Münich, Paper, 1978, pp. 77–80; Bon, F., Les élections en France - Histoire et sociologie, Paris, Editions du Seuil, 1978, pp. 96–100.Google Scholar

8 Cfr. Van den Bergh, , op. cit. , pp. 68–72.Google Scholar

9 Una traduzione inglese del suo articolo scritto nel 1910 si trova in Lijphart, A. e Gibberd, R.W., Threesholds and Payoffs in List System of Proportional Representation , in «European Journal of Political Research», V (1977), pp. 241–242.Google Scholar

10 Rosenzweig, J.A., Highest Average Methods of Allocating Seats Under Proportional Representation: A Clarification , in «Political Studies», XXIX (1981), pp. 279–281. Vedi anche Grofman, B., A Review of Macro Election Systems , in Wildenmann, R., (ed.), Sozialwissenschaftliches Jahrbuch für Politik, Vol. 4, Munich, Günther Olzog Verlag, 1975, p. 316.Google Scholar

11 Rae, , op. cit. , p. 34.Google Scholar

12 Taylor, P.J. e Johnston, J., Geography of Elections, Hermondsworth, Penguin Books, 1979, p. 67.Google Scholar

13 Elder, N.C.M., The Scandinavian States, in Finer, , op. cit. , p. 187.Google Scholar

14 Humphreys, J.H., Proportional Representation: a Study in Methods of Elections, London, Methuen, 1911, p. 188.Google Scholar

15 Cfr. Rae, , op. cit. , pp. 34–36; Grofman, , op. cit., p. 309; Wertman, D., The Italian Electoral Process: The Elections of June 1976 , in Penniman, R., (ed.), Italy at the Pools: The Parliamentary Elections of 1976, Washington, American Enterprise Institute, 1977, pp. 45–47.Google Scholar

16 Van den Bergh, , op. cit. , p. 25; Nohlen, op. cit., p. 78; Laakso, M., The Maximum Distortion and the Problem of the First Divisor of Different P.R. Systems, in «Scandinavian Political Studies», II (1979), p. 162.Google Scholar

17 Rae, , op. cit. , p. 34.Google Scholar

18 Wertman, , op. cit. , p. 45.Google Scholar

19 McLaren Carstairs, A., A Short History of Electoral Systems in Western Europe, London, Allen & Urwin, 1980, p. 159.Google Scholar

20 Laakso, , op. cit. , p. 162.Google Scholar

21 Johansen, L.N., Denmark , in Hand, G., Georgel, J. e Sasse, C., (eds.), European Electoral Systems Handbook, London, Butterworths, 1979, p. 47.Google Scholar

22 Hogan, J., Elections and Representation, Cork, Cork University Press, 1945, p. 13.Google Scholar

23 Cfr. Brams, S.J., Paradoxes in Politics: An Introduction to the Nonobvious in Political Science, New York, Free Press, 1976, pp. 137–166.Google Scholar