Electing Mayors: A Comparison of Different Electoral Procedures

Hendrik van der Kolk, C. Rallings, M. Thrasher

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    13 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In 2000 and 2002 the first direct elections for mayors were held in England. They were elected using the supplementary vote method. This article summarises the discussion which led to the adoptation of this electoral system, analyses some of the main arguments used, states some general criteria by which electoral systems can be judged, and evaluates some other possible methods for conducting such elections. It concludes that in the light of at least some general conditions, supplementary vote (SV) is a less desirable way of choosing a mayor than alternative vote (AV) and some other systems. However, it seems as if a simple amendment of the original SV procedure will avoid some of its most apparent problems.
    Original languageUndefined
    Pages (from-to)589-608
    Number of pages20
    JournalLocal government studies
    Volume30
    Issue number4
    Publication statusPublished - 2004

    Keywords

    • METIS-220134

    Cite this

    van der Kolk, Hendrik ; Rallings, C. ; Thrasher, M. / Electing Mayors: A Comparison of Different Electoral Procedures. In: Local government studies. 2004 ; Vol. 30, No. 4. pp. 589-608.
    @article{b0b2b8f44cee48989ec712a2dab30385,
    title = "Electing Mayors: A Comparison of Different Electoral Procedures",
    abstract = "In 2000 and 2002 the first direct elections for mayors were held in England. They were elected using the supplementary vote method. This article summarises the discussion which led to the adoptation of this electoral system, analyses some of the main arguments used, states some general criteria by which electoral systems can be judged, and evaluates some other possible methods for conducting such elections. It concludes that in the light of at least some general conditions, supplementary vote (SV) is a less desirable way of choosing a mayor than alternative vote (AV) and some other systems. However, it seems as if a simple amendment of the original SV procedure will avoid some of its most apparent problems.",
    keywords = "METIS-220134",
    author = "{van der Kolk}, Hendrik and C. Rallings and M. Thrasher",
    year = "2004",
    language = "Undefined",
    volume = "30",
    pages = "589--608",
    journal = "Local government studies",
    issn = "0300-3930",
    publisher = "Routledge",
    number = "4",

    }

    Electing Mayors: A Comparison of Different Electoral Procedures. / van der Kolk, Hendrik; Rallings, C.; Thrasher, M.

    In: Local government studies, Vol. 30, No. 4, 2004, p. 589-608.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Electing Mayors: A Comparison of Different Electoral Procedures

    AU - van der Kolk, Hendrik

    AU - Rallings, C.

    AU - Thrasher, M.

    PY - 2004

    Y1 - 2004

    N2 - In 2000 and 2002 the first direct elections for mayors were held in England. They were elected using the supplementary vote method. This article summarises the discussion which led to the adoptation of this electoral system, analyses some of the main arguments used, states some general criteria by which electoral systems can be judged, and evaluates some other possible methods for conducting such elections. It concludes that in the light of at least some general conditions, supplementary vote (SV) is a less desirable way of choosing a mayor than alternative vote (AV) and some other systems. However, it seems as if a simple amendment of the original SV procedure will avoid some of its most apparent problems.

    AB - In 2000 and 2002 the first direct elections for mayors were held in England. They were elected using the supplementary vote method. This article summarises the discussion which led to the adoptation of this electoral system, analyses some of the main arguments used, states some general criteria by which electoral systems can be judged, and evaluates some other possible methods for conducting such elections. It concludes that in the light of at least some general conditions, supplementary vote (SV) is a less desirable way of choosing a mayor than alternative vote (AV) and some other systems. However, it seems as if a simple amendment of the original SV procedure will avoid some of its most apparent problems.

    KW - METIS-220134

    M3 - Article

    VL - 30

    SP - 589

    EP - 608

    JO - Local government studies

    JF - Local government studies

    SN - 0300-3930

    IS - 4

    ER -