Blog 7: Sweden & Duverger’s
Law
Jeff Merrell
In order to determine the validity of Duverger’s law about
the number of effective political parties found in a state being a function of
that state’s electoral rules, I decided to study one country about which I know
almost nothing – Sweden. I have a
mission friend from Sweden, but know absolutely nothing about his native
country and its politics. Based on an
evaluation of Sweden’s electoral rules and election results, I believe that
Duverger’s law is, in fact, accurate.
The analysis performed in order to come to this conclusion is described
below.
Effective Parties
Sweden’s legislative body is unicameral in nature and the
most recent election held was in September 2010. Only parties who register at least 4% of the
nationwide vote are considered eligible for seat allocation and, in the 2010
election, eight parties surpassed that threshold (see the table below). Based on the formula used to calculate the
number of effective parties (Neff), Sweden has 4.83 effective
parties.
If Duverger’s law states that single-member-district
plurality (SMDP) electoral systems lead to two effective parties and that
proportional representation (PR) systems produce more than two, Sweden’s actual
political environment is in line with that law.
Sweden’s electoral system is based on PR.
Party
|
Vote %
|
p2
|
Social
Democratic Party (SAP)
|
30.66
|
0.094
|
Moderate
Party (M)
|
30.06
|
0.09
|
Green
Party (Mpg)
|
7.34
|
0.005
|
Liberal
Party (FP)
|
7.06
|
0.005
|
Center
Party
|
6.56
|
0.004
|
Sweden
Democrats (SD)
|
5.70
|
0.003
|
Left
Party (VP)
|
5.60
|
0.003
|
Christian
Democrats (KD)
|
5.60
|
0.003
|
TOTAL Neff
|
4.83
|
Electoral Rules[2]
Below is a description of the various characteristics of
Sweden’s electoral rules, including how elections are executed, as well as the
following traits: district magnitude, formula, list structure, and thresholds.
Elections Overview. Sweden’s Parliament (or Riksdag) is composed
of 349 seats in total and elections for those seats are held every four years. The country is divided into 29 multi-member
constituencies, and 310 of those seats are allocated to each constituency. The number of seats allotted to each
constituency is revised every election cycle, depending on the number of voters
in each constituency. The seat
distribution in each constituency is calculated using a modified version of the
Sainte-Laguë format, which allows distribution to remain very close to each
party’s proportion of votes. The
remaining 39 seats fall within an additional constituency that is based on
nationwide voting (as opposed to the other 29 constituencies whose seat
distributions are dependent on constituency-wide voting).
District magnitude. The average district magnitude (total
seats/total districts) is 349/30, or 11.6 seats per district. In reality, however, that number is not
true. The more populated districts (or,
in Sweden’s terms, constituencies) are allotted more seats and the last
district is based on nationwide voting and receives 39 seats.
Formula. As mentioned above, Sweden employs the Sainte-Laguë
method in determining seat allocation.
It is modified from the original method by employing a greater divisor
in its calculations, which ultimately tends to slightly favor larger parties
over smaller ones.
List Structure. Sweden employs a closed-party list system
with preferential voting. Each party has
full discretion to rank its candidates in the desired order and voters can then
use preference votes to any candidate(s) they desire. Any candidate who receives a number of
preference votes equal to or greater than eight percent of his/her party’s vote
total is automatically placed at the top of the list.
Thresholds. There are two threshold restrictions seen in
Sweden’s electoral rules. For political
parties, they are required to obtain 4 percent of nationwide votes or 12
percent of the votes in a particular constituency in order to earn a seat in
Parliament. For individual candidates,
they must receive at least eight percent preference votes of their party’s
votes in a particular constituency in order to be awarded a seat based solely
on preference votes.
[1] The
data for this table was obtained from the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s Parline website
after searching for Sweden’s information. http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2303_E.htm.
[2]
The information for this section was obtained from two sources: (1) the
Inter-Parliamentary Union’s Parline website and (2) Wikipedia’s
Electionworld. http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2303_B.htm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Electionworld/Electionworld.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI did Russia which also has a PR system. It has four parties that hold seats. This small number of parties brought the neff down to 2.8 which is very different from Sweden's 4.83. It seems like Sweden is the perfect example of Devurger's law.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your organization. I found it very easy to read and well-put together. Thank you for the clear conclusions and evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe table was a nice addition to help understand the information and your use of footnotes was not distracting and was well done. Your conclusions were interesting and well thought out.
ReplyDeleteNice job, the organization of your post was great. I didn't realize Sweden's electoral system was so complex, but it seems that most interests are well represented there.
ReplyDelete