Índice de Gallagher

El índice de Gallagher, creado por Michael Gallagher, "mide la desproporción relativa entre los votos recibidos y los asientos obtenidos en una legislatura dentro de un sistema electoral".^[1]^[2] Como tal, mide la diferencia entre el porcentaje de votos que obtiene cada partido político y el porcentaje de posiciones obtenidas en el congreso".

El índice se mide con la ecuación siguiente, en la cual se obtiene la raíz cuadrada de la mitad de la suma de los cuadrados de la diferencia del porcentaje de voto ( $V_{i}$ ) y el porcentaje de posiciones ( $S_{i}$ ) de cada partido político ( $i=1...n$ ).^[3]

\mathrm {LSq} ={\sqrt {{\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}(V_{i}-S_{i})^{2}}}

^[4]

Atención obtenida en Canadá[editar]

Desde diciembre de 2017, en Canadá, el índice de Gallagher ha recibido bastante atención, debido a las reformas que se han querido realizar a su sistema electoral.^[5]^[6] El comité especial (parlamentario) de reformas electorales recomendó que el gobierno debería utilizar el índice mencionado para minimizar el nivel de distorsión en el parlamento entre la voluntad popular del electorado y las posiciones que se entregan en el parlamento. Así mismo, el comité recomendó que se procurara elaborar un sistema que obtenga un índice de 5.0 o menos.^[7]^[8] En la elección federal canadiense de 2015, tal índice fue de 12.02.^[9]

Referencias[editar]

↑ Special Committee on Electoral Reform (a Canadian Parliamentary Committee) (1 de diciembre de 2016), Report 3: Strengthening Democracy in Canada : Principles, Process and Public Engagement for Electoral Reform, Parliament of Canada, p. 69 (or p. 83 in PDF search), consultado el 26 de diciembre de 2016, «One tool that has been developed to measure an electoral system’s relative disproportionality between votes received and seats allotted in a legislature is the Gallagher Index, which was developed by Michael Gallagher (who appeared before the Committee).» .
↑ O'Malley, Kady (1 de diciembre de 2016). «Read the full electoral reform committee report, plus Liberal and NDP/Green opinions». Ottawa Citizen (Ottawa Citizen). Consultado el 26 de diciembre de 2016.
↑ Gallagher, Michael (1991). «Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems». Electoral Studies 10: 33-51. doi:10.1016/0261-3794(91)90004-c.
↑ Gallagher, 1991, p. 40.
↑ Cash, Colby (2 de diciembre de 2016). «Colby Cosh: Did Maryam Monsef actually read the whole electoral reform report?». National Post. Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.
↑ Wherry, Aaron (1 de diciembre de 2016). «Minister 'disappointed' as electoral reform committee recommends referendum on proportional representation». CBC News. Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.
↑ O'Malley, Kady (1 de diciembre de 2016). «Read the full electoral reform committee report, plus Liberal and NDP/Green opinions». Ottawa Citizen (Ottawa Citizen). Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.
↑ «Is Canada Fair?». Measuring Unfairness — Calculating Canada's Gallagher Index. (This website includes the Gallagher Index in adjustable table format. It initially shows the data for Canada's 2015 federal election, but some variables in some table cells are adjustable by the visitor to the website, and then the rest of the table is automatically adjusted to reflect this visitor's new input.). Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.
↑ The rules for federal elections in Canada require that certain provinces always get a certain quantity of seats – on a province by province basis. If so, then Byron Weber Becker proposed that the Gallagher index for Canada ought to ALSO reflect that. In other words, the Gallagher data should be collected on a province by province basis; and the Gallagher score should be calculated on a province by province basis. Only after that is done, can we then add up all of those provincial scores and then average them out to get the true national "composite Gallagher index" score. If we do that, then the illustrated table calculation of 12 for Canada is incorrect. It should instead show a "composite Gallagher index" of 17.1. Byron Weber Becker developed this "composite" index. See citation here: Special Committee on Electoral Reform (a Canadian Parliamentary Committee) (1 de diciembre de 2016), Report 3: Strengthening Democracy in Canada : Principles, Process and Public Engagement for Electoral Reform, Parliament of Canada, p. 69 (or p. 83 in PDF search), consultado el 26 de diciembre de 2016, «...Professor Becker developed the “Gallagher Index Composite” for the Committee’s study...» .

Bibliografía[editar]

Benoit, Kenneth (2000). «Which Electoral Formula Is the Most Proportional? A New Look with New Evidence». Political Analysis 8: 381-388. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.pan.a029822. Consultado el 10 de agosto de 2013.
Gallagher, Michael (1991). «Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems». Electoral Studies 10: 33-51. doi:10.1016/0261-3794(91)90004-c.
Gallagher, Michael (1992). «Comparing Proportional Representation Electoral Systems: Quotas, Thresholds, Paradoxes and Majorities». British Journal of Political Science 22: 469-496. doi:10.1017/s0007123400006499.
Gallagher, Michael; Mitchell, P, eds. (2005). The Politics of Electoral Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Appendix B. ISBN 0-19-925756-6.
Kestelman, Philip (marzo de 1999). «Quantifying Representativity». Voting matters 10. Consultado el 10 de agosto de 2013.

Datos: Q1492184
Multimedia: Gallagher Index / Q1492184

[1] Special Committee on Electoral Reform (a Canadian Parliamentary Committee) (1 de diciembre de 2016), Report 3: Strengthening Democracy in Canada : Principles, Process and Public Engagement for Electoral Reform, Parliament of Canada, p. 69 (or p. 83 in PDF search), consultado el 26 de diciembre de 2016, «One tool that has been developed to measure an electoral system’s relative disproportionality between votes received and seats allotted in a legislature is the Gallagher Index, which was developed by Michael Gallagher (who appeared before the Committee).» .

[2] O'Malley, Kady (1 de diciembre de 2016). «Read the full electoral reform committee report, plus Liberal and NDP/Green opinions». Ottawa Citizen (Ottawa Citizen). Consultado el 26 de diciembre de 2016.

[3] Gallagher, Michael (1991). «Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems». Electoral Studies 10: 33-51. doi:10.1016/0261-3794(91)90004-c.

[FOOTNOTEGallagher199140-4] Gallagher, 1991, p. 40.

[5] Cash, Colby (2 de diciembre de 2016). «Colby Cosh: Did Maryam Monsef actually read the whole electoral reform report?». National Post. Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.

[6] Wherry, Aaron (1 de diciembre de 2016). «Minister 'disappointed' as electoral reform committee recommends referendum on proportional representation». CBC News. Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.

[7] O'Malley, Kady (1 de diciembre de 2016). «Read the full electoral reform committee report, plus Liberal and NDP/Green opinions». Ottawa Citizen (Ottawa Citizen). Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.

[8] «Is Canada Fair?». Measuring Unfairness — Calculating Canada's Gallagher Index. (This website includes the Gallagher Index in adjustable table format. It initially shows the data for Canada's 2015 federal election, but some variables in some table cells are adjustable by the visitor to the website, and then the rest of the table is automatically adjusted to reflect this visitor's new input.). Consultado el 10 de diciembre de 2016.

[9] The rules for federal elections in Canada require that certain provinces always get a certain quantity of seats – on a province by province basis. If so, then Byron Weber Becker proposed that the Gallagher index for Canada ought to ALSO reflect that. In other words, the Gallagher data should be collected on a province by province basis; and the Gallagher score should be calculated on a province by province basis. Only after that is done, can we then add up all of those provincial scores and then average them out to get the true national "composite Gallagher index" score. If we do that, then the illustrated table calculation of 12 for Canada is incorrect. It should instead show a "composite Gallagher index" of 17.1. Byron Weber Becker developed this "composite" index. See citation here: Special Committee on Electoral Reform (a Canadian Parliamentary Committee) (1 de diciembre de 2016), Report 3: Strengthening Democracy in Canada : Principles, Process and Public Engagement for Electoral Reform, Parliament of Canada, p. 69 (or p. 83 in PDF search), consultado el 26 de diciembre de 2016, «...Professor Becker developed the “Gallagher Index Composite” for the Committee’s study...» .

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]