1 / 27

Evaluation of parties and coalitions with regard to party manifestos

Evaluation of parties and coalitions with regard to party manifestos. Andranik Tangian Hans-Böckler Foundation D-40476 Düsseldorf University of Karlsruhe D-76128 andranik-tangian@boeckler.de. Agenda . 1 Introduction 2 Model for elections 2005 3 Evaluation of parties

nydia
Download Presentation

Evaluation of parties and coalitions with regard to party manifestos

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation of parties and coalitions with regard to party manifestos Andranik TangianHans-Böckler Foundation D-40476 Düsseldorf University of Karlsruhe D-76128 andranik-tangian@boeckler.de Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  2. Agenda 1 Introduction 2 Model for elections 2005 3 Evaluation of parties 4 Evaluation of coalitions 5 Summary 6 Extension of the model to elections 2009 7 Mathematical annex Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  3. 1.1 Introduction: Bundestagswahl 2005 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  4. 1.2 Introduction: Data (2005 on party manifestos) Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  5. 1.3 Introduction: Methodology Data like for the Wahl-O-Mat representation of programs by Yes/No answers Task is different Wahl-O-Mat:fit single voters to parties Our model: fit parties to the electorate Method: indicators of popularity and universality Goal of the paper to evaluateve leading parties and coalitions Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  6. 2.1 Model: Representativeness

  7. 2.2 Model: Indicators Popularity: % of the electorate represented, averaged on 95 questions • spatial aspect of representativeness Universality: frequency of representing a majority • temporal aspect of representativeness Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  8. 3.1 Evaluation of parties: Indices

  9. 3.4 Evaluation of parties: Implications SPD is the most popular and universal party • in spite of shortage of votes High representativeness of trade unions • no interrogation of public opinion Weighting plays a negligible role • henceforth, only unweighted indicators are considered Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  10. 4.1 Evaluation of coalitions: Definitions Unanimity of a coalition is the weight of questions with unanimousopinions of coalition members Proportionality of impact to weight • on non-unanimous questions, the impact of coalition fractions (probability that the opinion is decisive) is proportional to their size • total uncertainty (equal chances of alternative opinions) • both factors are considered with weights p and (1 - p), 0 ≤ p ≤ 1 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  11. 4.2 Evaluation of coalitions: Definitions (continued) Popularityof coalition is its expected representativeness Universality of a coalition is ist expected rounded representativeness Accuracy of prediction of the indicators is the standard deviation of representativeness and of rounded representativeness Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  12. 4.3 Evaluation of coalitions: Indices

  13. 4.4 Evaluation of coalitions: Principal component analysis Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  14. 4.5 Evaluation of coalitions: Implications Coalition SPD/CDU (now in power) has high popularity but low unanimity and mediocre universality Coalition SPD/Green/Left-Party (much discussed but not realized) has higher unanimity, lower popularity but much higher universality Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  15. 4.6 Evaluation of coalitions: Implications (continued) Coalition CDU/FDP (held before the elections) has a higher unanimity but low indices of popularity and universality Coalition SPD/Green/Left-Party(failed due to personal conicts between party leaders) might be the best alternative Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  16. 5 Summary The indices of popularity and universality are derived from votes and party manifestos for parties, their coalitions, and trade unions The SPD was the most representative party, although it was not the election winner A better alternative to the actual coalition CDU/SPD: SPD/ Green/Left-Party Simple computing algorithms Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  17. 6.1 Remake for elections 2009 (Matthias Hölzlein) Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  18. 6.2 Evaluation of the remake 2009 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE The SPD is the most popular party (65%) FDP the is most universal The CDU/CSU as the strongest party in parliament has only mediocre indicators Contradiction to the shares of votes received: Electors, seem to pay more attention to the traditional image of parties rather than to what they vote for

  19. 6.3 Electorate profile for 32 Wal-o-mat questions Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE Survey data on balance of opinions on each question: Opinion polls like of the Politbarometer by institutes Wahlen or Forsa 6 of 38 Wal-o-mat questions 2009 are not covered by the polls and are omitted A few questions from the retained ones are matched to survey questions Equal weighting of questions

  20. 6.4 Model 2009 for directly estimated electorate profiles Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  21. 6.5 Evaluation 2009 for directly estimated electorate profiles Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE Under the direct method, the three left/ socialist parties are most popular and universal. The Left-Party is the strongest. The two governing parties CDU/CSU and FDP have the lowest indicators Electors vote for the parties with whom they disagree on most of issues: Irrational behavior of the electorate? Left-Parties are considered populist rather than reliable for government work?

  22. 7.1 Mathematical annex Notation Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  23. 7.2 Mathematical annex Definitions (parties) Representativeness: Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  24. 7.3 Mathematical annex Theorem 1 (indices of parties) Analogy with force vectors in physics: The most popular (universal) candidate has the largest projection of his opinion vector bc on the µ-weighted social vector of balance of opinions, respectively, of majority opinion Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  25. 7.4 Mathematical annex Definitions (coalitions) Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  26. 7.5 Mathematical annex Theorem 2.1 (on coalitions) where Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

  27. 7.6 Mathematical annex Theorem 2.2 (on coalitions) If the coalition opinions on non-unanimous questions are independent (= independent negotiations on every question) then Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE

More Related