Highest averages method

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Voting series:
This series is part of the Politics and the Election series

Voting Voting system Ballot Vote counting system Approval voting Bloc voting Borda count Condorcet method Coombs' method Copeland's method Cumulative voting D'Hondt method Droop Quota Dynamically Distributed Democracy Election threshold Hare Quota Highest averages method Instant-runoff voting Kemeny-Young method Largest remainder method Party list Plurality voting Preferential voting Proportional approval voting Range voting Ranked pairs Sainte-Laguë method Schulze method Single Transferable Vote Spoilt vote
Politics Portal · edit

The highest averages method is one way of allocating seats proportionally for representative assemblies with party list voting systems.

The highest averages method requires the number of votes for each party to be divided successively by a series of divisors, and seats are allocated to parties that secure the highest resulting quotient or average, up to the total number of seats available. The most widely used is the d'Hondt formula, using the divisors 1,2,3,4... The Sainte-Laguë method divides the votes with odd numbers (1,3,5,7 etc). The Sainte-Laguë method can also be modified, for instance by the replacement of the first divisor by 1.4, which in small constituencies has the effect of prioritizing proportionality for larger parties over smaller ones at the allocation of the first few seats.

Another highest average method is called Imperiali (not to be confused with the Imperiali quota which is a Largest remainder method). The divisors are 2,3,4 etc. It is used only in Belgian municipal elections.

In addition to the procedure above, highest averages methods can be conceived of in a different way. In this manner, what was called the divisor above will now be the quotient, and what was called the quotient will now be the divisor. For an election, a divisor is calculated, usually the total number of votes cast divided by the number of seats to be allocated. Then, each parties' quotient is calculated by dividing their vote total by the divisor. Parties are then allocated seats by rounding the quotient to a whole number. Rounding down is equivalent to using the d'Hondt method, while rounding to the nearest whole number is equivalent to the Sainte-Laguë method. However, because of the rounding, this will not necessarily result in the desired number of seats being filled. In that case, the divisor may be adjusted up or down until the number of seats after rounding is equal to the desired number.

The tables used in the d'Hondt method can then be viewed as calculating the lowest divisor necessary to round off to a given number of seats. For example, the quotient which wins the first seat in a d'Hondt calculation is the lowest divisor necessary to have one party's vote, when rounded down, be greater than 1. The quotient for the second round is the lowest divisor necessary to have a total of 2 seats allocated, and so on.

An alternative to the highest averages method is the largest remainder method, which use a minimum quota which can be calculated in a number of ways.

1 Comparison between the d'Hondt and Sainte-Laguë methods
- 1.1 The unmodified Sainte-Laguë method shows differences for the first mandates
- 1.2 With the modification, the methods are initially more similar
2 See also

[edit] Comparison between the d'Hondt and Sainte-Laguë methods

[edit] The unmodified Sainte-Laguë method shows differences for the first mandates

seat	seat allocation
	d'Hondt method						unmodified Sainte-Laguë method
parties	Yellows	Whites	Reds	Greens	Blues	Pinks	Yellows	Whites	Reds	Greens	Blues	Pinks
votes	47,000	16,000	15,900	12,000	6,000	3,100	47,000	16,000	15,900	12,000	6,000	3,100
mandate	quotient
mandate
1	47,000	16,000	15,900	12,000	6,000	3,100	47,000	16,000	15,900	12,000	6,000	3,100
2	23,500	8,000	7,950	6,000	3,000	1,550	15,667	5,333	5,300	4,000	2,000	1,033
3	15,667	5,333	5,300	4,000	2,000	1,033	9,400	3,200	3,180	2,400	1,200	620
4	11,750	4,000	3,975	3,000	1,500	775	6,714	2,857	2,271	1,714	875	443
5	9,400	3,200	3,180	2,400	1,200	620	5,222	1,778	1,767	1.333	667	333
6	7,833	2,667	2,650	2,000	1,000	517	4,273	1,454	1,445	1,091	545	282
1	47,000						47,000
2	23,500							16,000
3		16,000							15,900
4			15,900				15,667
5	15,667									12,000
6				12,000			9,400
7	11,750						6,714
8	9,400										6,000
9		8,000						5,333
10			7,950						5,300

[edit] With the modification, the methods are initially more similar

seat	seat allocation
	d'Hondt method						modified Sainte-Laguë method
parties	Yellows	Whites	Reds	Greens	Blues	Pinks	Yellows	Whites	Reds	Greens	Blues	Pinks
votes	47,000	16,000	15,900	12,000	6,000	3,100	47,000	16,000	15,900	12,000	6,000	3,100
mandate	quotient
mandate
1	47,000	16,000	15,900	12,000	6,000	3,100	33,571	11,429	11,357	8,571	4,286	2,214
2	23,500	8,000	7,950	6,000	3,000	1,550	15,667	5,333	5,300	4,000	2,000	1,033
3	15,667	5,333	5,300	4,000	2,000	1,033	9,400	3,200	3,180	2,400	1,200	620
4	11,750	4,000	3,975	3,000	1,500	775	6,714	2,857	2,271	1,714	875	443
5	9,400	3,200	3,180	2,400	1,200	620	5,222	1,778	1,767	1.333	667	333
6	7,833	2,667	2,650	2,000	1,000	517	4,273	1,454	1,445	1,091	545	282
1	47,000						33,571
2	23,500						15,667
3		16,000						11,429
4			15,900						11,357
5	15,667						9,400
6				12,000						8,571
7	11,750						6,714
8	9,400							5,333
9		8,000							5,300
10			7,950				5,222