Analysis of party systems by measures of concentration of inequality and asymmetry of the Pareto curve

Gennady Aleksandrovich Grachev

ПРЕПРИНТ

Эта статья является препринтом и не была отрецензирована.
О результатах, изложенных в препринтах, не следует сообщать в СМИ как о проверенной информации.

Analysis of party systems by measures of concentration of inequality and asymmetry of the Pareto curve

G. A. Grachev

2022-08-22

https://doi.org/10.24108/preprints-3112465

In this article, the Hoover index and asymmetry coefficient of the Pareto curve were tested to measure the state of the systems. When applying the new concept to the analysis of party systems in 18 European countries (158 election cases), we found that most of them showed a left-hand asymmetry of the Pareto curve and a concentration of inequality close to the Pareto principle

Ссылка для цитирования:

Grachev G. A. 2022. Analysis of party systems by measures of concentration of inequality and asymmetry of the Pareto curve. PREPRINTS.RU. https://doi.org/10.24108/preprints-3112465

Список литературы

1. Bogaards, M. (2004). Counting parties and identifying dominant party systems in Africa. European Journal of Political Research, 43(2), 173–197.

2. Clementi, F., Gallegati, M., Gianmoena, L., Landini, S., & Stiglitz, J. E. (2019). Mis-measurement of inequality: a critical reflection and new insights. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-019-00257-2

3. Curie, P. (1894). Sur la symétrie dans les phénomènes physiques, symétrie d’un champ électrique et d’un champ magnétique. J. Phys. Theor. Appl, 1, 393–415. https://doi.org/10.1051/jphystap:018940030039300ï

4. Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy. Journal of Political Economy, 65(2), 135–150.

5. Dunleavy, P., & Boucek, F. (2016). Constructing the Number of Parties: Party Politics, 9(3), 291–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068803009003002

6. Epstein, J. M., & Axtell, R. L. (1996). Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up. Growing Artificial Societies. https://doi.org/10.7551/MITPRESS/3374.001.0001

7. Gaines, B. J., & Taagepera, R. (2014). More on Measuring Two-Party Competition: A Response to Dunleavy. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 24(3), 386–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2014.913597

8. Golosov, G. V. (2010). The effective number of parties: A new approach. Party Politics, 16(2), 171–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068809339538

9. Grachev, G. A. (2009). Sistemnye zakonomernosti neravenstva dokhodov naseleniya. Ekonomicheskie Nauki, 8(57), 327-331. (In Russ.).

10. Grachev, G. A. (2011). On the Assessment of Political Stability on the Basis of Results of Voting at the Elections. POLIS-Politicheskiye Issledovaniya, 5, 123-127. (In Russ.).

11. Grachev, G. A. (2012). Assessment of the political stability at the latest Russian parliamentary and presidential elections. POLIS-Politicheskiye Issledovaniya (In Russ.), 3, 30-35. (In Russ.).

12. Grachev, G. A. (2013). Upravlenie strukturoi denezhnykh dokhodov naseleniya na osnove printsipa Pareto. Тerra Economicus (in Russ.), 11(1), 57–63.

13. Grachev, G. A. (2022). Size distribution of states, counties, and cities in the USA: New inequality form information. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 592, 126831. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSA.2021.126831

14. Hoover, E. (1936). The Measurement of Industrial Localization. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 18, 162–171. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/1927875

15. Juran, J. M. (1954). Universals in management planning and controlling. Management Review, 43(11), 748–761.

16. Juran, J. M. (1975). The Non-Pareto Principle; mea culpa. Quality Progress, 8(5), 8–9.

17. Kakwani, N. (1980). Income inequality and poverty : methods of estimation and policy applications. Published for the World Bank [by] Oxford University Press.

18. Laakso, M., & Taagepera, R. (1979). “Effective” number of parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 12(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/001041407901200101

19. Magyar, Z. B. (2022). What Makes Party Systems Different? A Principal Component Analysis of 17 Advanced Democracies 1970–2013. 30(2), 250. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2021.21

20. McCarthy, D. M., & Winer, R. S. (2019). The Pareto rule in marketing revisited: is it 80/20 or 70/20? Marketing Letters, 30(2), 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-019-09490-y

21. Molinar, J. (1991). Counting the Number of Parties: An Alternative IndexNo Title. American Political Science Review, 8(4), 1383–1391.

22. Pareto, V., & Page, A. N. (1971). Translation of Manuale di economia politica (‘Manual of political economy’). A.M. Kelley.

23. Pietra, G. (1915). Delle relazioni tra gli indici di variabilita: Vol. Note I, II. Atti del Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze.

24. Rae, D. (1967). The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws. CT: Yale University Press.

25. Schutz, R. R. (1951). On the Measurement of Income Inequality. American Economic Review, 41, 107–122.

26. Sharp, B., Romaniuk, J., & Graham, C. (2019). Marketing’s 60/20 Pareto Law. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3498097

27. Spoon, J.-J., & Klüver, H. (2019). Party convergence and vote switching: Explaining mainstream party decline across Europe. European Journal of Political ResearchVolume 58, Issue 4 p. 1021-1042, 58(4), 1021–1042.

28. Taagepera, R. (1999). The Number of Parties as a Function of Heterogeneity and Electoral System. Comparative Political Studies, 32(5), 531–548. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414099032005001

29. Vayrynen, R. (1972). Analysis of Party Systems by Concentration, Fractionalization, and Entropy Measures. Scandinavian Political Studies, 7, 138–155.

30. Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort (Issue Cambridge, (Mass.): Addison-Wesley,). Cambridge, (Mass.): Addison-Wesley. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(195007)6:3<306::aid-jclp2270060331>3.0.co;2-7

ПРЕПРИНТ

ИНФОРМАЦИЯ