Part of the Politics series
Electoral systems
Single-winner/majoritarian Plurality First-past-the-post Plurality at-large (plurality block voting) General ticket (party block voting) Multi-round voting Two-round Exhaustive ballot Primary election Nonpartisan unified top-four Majority at-large (two-round block voting) Ranked / preferential systems Instant-runoff (alternative vote) Contingent vote Coombs' method Condorcet methods (Copeland's, Dodgson's, Kemeny–Young, Minimax, Nanson's, ranked pairs, Schulze, Alternative Smith) Positional voting (Borda count, Nauru/Dowdall method) Bucklin voting Oklahoma primary electoral system Preferential block voting Cardinal / graded systems Score voting Approval voting Combined approval voting Unified primary Usual judgment Satisfaction approval voting Majority judgment STAR voting
Proportional representation Party-list Electoral list open list closed list local lists Apportionment Sainte-Laguë D'Hondt Huntington–Hill Hare Droop Imperiali Hagenbach-Bischoff National remnant Highest averages Largest remainder Proportional forms of ranked voting Single transferable vote Gregory Wright Schulze STV CPO-STV Ranked party list PR Spare vote Proportional forms of cardinal voting Proportional approval voting Sequential proportional approval voting Method of Equal Shares Phragmen's voting rules Biproportional apportionment Fair majority voting Weighted voting Direct representation Interactive representation Liquid democracy
Mixed systems By type of representation Mixed-member majoritarian Mixed-member proportional Non-compensatory mixed systems Parallel voting Majority bonus Compensatory mixed systems Additional member system Mixed single vote (positive vote transfer) Scorporo (negative vote transfer) Mixed ballot transferable vote Alternative Vote Plus Dual-member proportional Rural–urban proportional
Other systems and related theory Semi-proportional representation Single non-transferable vote Limited voting Cumulative voting Binomial voting Other systems Multiple non-transferable vote Double simultaneous vote Proxy voting Delegated voting Indirect STV Liquid democracy Random selection (sortition, random ballot) Supermajority Social choice theory Arrow's theorem Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem Public choice theory Veto Players List of electoral systems List of electoral systems by country Comparison of electoral systems Effects of electoral systems Political fragmentation Political efficacy Voter turnout
Politics portal

Proportionality for solid coalitions (PSC) is a fairness criterion for ranked voting systems. It is an adaptation of the proportional representation criterion to voting systems in which there are no parties, the voters can vote directly for candidates, and can rank the candidates in any way they want. This criterion was proposed by the British philosopher and logician Michael Dummett.^[1][2]

Solid coalitions

In party-list systems, proportional representation guarantees each party a number of representatives proportional to its number of votes. In systems without parties, the natural analogue of a "party" is a solid coalition. Informally, a solid coalition is a group of voters who prefer any candidate within a certain set of candidates over any candidate not in the set. A set of voters ${\displaystyle V}$ is a solid coalition for a set of candidates ${\displaystyle C}$, if every voter in ${\displaystyle V}$ ranks every candidate in ${\displaystyle C}$ ahead of every candidate that is not in ${\displaystyle C}$.

When a voter is part of a solid coalition that prefers some set of candidates, they are said to be "solidly supporting" or "solidly committed to" that set of candidates.^[3][4] Any voter who ranks a single candidate as their 1st choice solidly supports that candidate.

Note that a solid coalition may be "nested" within another solid coalition; for example, there may be a faction of voters that can further be split into subfactions.

In the following let ${\displaystyle n}$ be the number of voters, ${\displaystyle k}$ be the number of seats to be filled and ${\displaystyle j}$ be some positive integer.

k–PSC

${\displaystyle k}$–PSC is defined with respect to the Hare quota ${\displaystyle n/k}$. If ${\displaystyle V}$ is a solid coalition for ${\displaystyle C}$ and the number of Voters in ${\displaystyle V}$ is at least ${\displaystyle j}$ Hare quotas, then at least ${\displaystyle j}$ candidates from ${\displaystyle C}$ must be elected (if ${\displaystyle C}$ has less than ${\displaystyle j}$ candidates at all, then all of them have to be elected).^[5] This criterion was proposed by Michael Dummett.^[1]

In the single-winner case, k-PSC is equivalent to the unanimity criterion, as a Hare quota there would comprise all voters.

The most prominent example of a rule that satisfies k-PSC is Single transferable vote.^[6]

k + 1–PSC

${\displaystyle k+1}$–PSC is defined like ${\displaystyle k}$–PSC, but with respect to the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota ${\displaystyle n/(k+1)}$ instead of the Hare quota: the number of voters in ${\displaystyle V}$ must exceed ${\displaystyle j}$ Hagenbach-Bischoff quotas.^[5] (The reason it is "exceed" rather than "at least" here is because there can be more HB quotas than seats.)

It is a generalization of the majority criterion in the sense that it relates to groups of supported candidates (solid coalitions) instead of just one candidate, and there may be more than one seat to be filled. Because some authors call the fraction ${\displaystyle n/(k+1)}$ Droop quota, ${\displaystyle k+1}$–PSC is also known as Droop proportionality criterion.^[2]

One major implication of Droop proportionality is that a majority solid coalition will always be able to elect at least half of the seats. This is because a majority is always over n/2 voters, which is equivalent to a number of voters exceeding half of the Hagenbach-Bischoff quotas (There are (k+1) Hagenbach-Bischoff quotas in an election, since (n/(k+1)) * (k+1) = n, so (k+1)/2, which is half of the quotas * n/(k+1), which is the quota, = n/2).

Generalizations

Aziz and Lee^[7] define a property called generalized PSC, and another property, called inclusion PSC, that apply also to weak rankings (rankings with indifferences). Their expanding approvals rule satisfies generalized PSC.

Brill and Peters^[8] define a fairness property called Rank-PJR+, which also applies to weak rankings, but makes positive guarantees also to coalitions that are only partially solid. Rank-PJR+ is attained by the expanding approvals rule, but violated by the single transferable vote. It can be decided in polynomial time whether a given committee satisfies Rank-PJR+.

See also

• Justified representation – properties analogous to proportional representation for electoral systems using approval ballots.
• Mutual majority criterion – the single-winner case of the Droop proportionality criterion.

References