WHEN IT PAYS TO LOSE: THE FUNDAMENTAL FLAW OF THE POSITIVE VOTE TRANSFER ELECTORAL SYSTEM A comment on Daniel Bochsler (2014), 'Which mixed-member proportional electoral formula fits you best? Assessing the proportionality principle of positive vote transfer systems', Representation 50 (1): 113-127

• Published in: Representation (McDougall Trust) Vol. 51; no. 2; pp. 253 - 260
• Main Author: Raabe, Johannes
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Routledge 03-04-2015
• Subjects: Bochsler, Daniel; Elections; Electoral systems; Political parties; Proportional representation; Vote transfer; Votes
• ISSN: 0034-4893; 1749-4001
• DOI: 10.1080/00344893.2015.1064221

This comment shows that the positive vote transfer (PVT) system-deemed a preferable alternative to the mixed-member proportional electoral system-suffers from a fundamental flaw. The problem with this system combining elections within single-seat districts and the allocation of compensation seats is that parties may find it rational to try to lose district races in order to gain greater parliamentary representation. The PVT system may suffer from strategic manipulation and in the process can cause a vote cast for a party to be detrimental to its success. The general lesson is that in multitier electoral systems the relative value of votes in different tiers may induce strategic behaviour notwithstanding the number of votes at the voter's disposal.