Importance that revêt the act to vote in a democratic system justifies that many theorists are leaning on the voting systems . To date, several voting systems in force or are proposed; they cause many Polémique S which take part in the intensification of the democracy.
The object of this article is to make an inventory of the voting systems in force or reflection and to specify the constraints of “a good” voting system.
The aspects of electoral Procedure (calculation, poll, etc) and of Electorate and eligibility are treated in addition.
A voting system can also concerned the weight allotted to each vote.
Kenneth Arrow received the Prix of the Bank of Sweden in economic scenes in memory of Alfred Nobel in 1972 to have shown, in its thesis of 1951, impossibility of transforming individual preferences into collective choice without violating at least one of the following conditions:
In fact, all the various systems violate various ways these conditions. Many finds that the Méthode Condorcet remains sufficiently good, because she violates only in a minor way a criterion among the least important.
The various voting systems have certain advantages and certain disadvantages. To determine the voting system which corresponds best to the objective of the organizer, were specified Critères of voting systems. They make it possible to facilitate the choice of the organizer but there does not exist any voting system checking all the inventoried criteria.
The methods being the same ones, one will not distinguish between the bearing choices on people (election) and those which relate to decisions: the term of option will be used.
The majority of the voting systems belong to the one of the following categories, or are the result of the mixture of several of these categories.
For practical reasons, one will quote the polls with several turns, although these systems can be assimilated to combinations, within one only procedure, several distinct polls and sometimes according to different methods.
Lastly, it is necessary to point out that the vote is a system of particular Marché: the parties sell to the voters their options using promises, and the voters buy these options using an ad hoc currency, the “voice”; in fact the most sold options are retained. From there it is thus possible to imagine an infinity of alternatives, by changing very small little rules applicable to the currency used (the “voice”: data irrevocably or being able to be only lent for one limited time; exchangeable or not before the vote; at lifespan limited or on the contrary durable, fractionnable or not, etc), to the options which can be marketing, with the management of time (collection over one long period, as for a petition, or short), etc One can thus quote only part of the techniques of possible vote: most frequently actually used, and under consideration by the theory.
For memory, the most general system (the market where the “voice” is quite simply the ordinary currency) is evoked in the article Marché.
| Random links: | Tesis | Sky One | Clement Faugier | Fenwick | Grudaš |