An Entity of Type: WikicatVotingSystemCriteria, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

An apportionment paradox exists when the rules for apportionment in a political system produce results which are unexpected or seem to violate common sense. To apportion is to divide into parts according to some rule, the rule typically being one of proportion. Certain quantities, like milk, can be divided in any proportion whatsoever; others, such as horses, cannot—only whole numbers will do. In the latter case, there is an inherent tension between the desire to obey the rule of proportion as closely as possible and the constraint restricting the size of each portion to discrete values. This results, at times, in unintuitive observations, or paradoxes.

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • An apportionment paradox exists when the rules for apportionment in a political system produce results which are unexpected or seem to violate common sense. To apportion is to divide into parts according to some rule, the rule typically being one of proportion. Certain quantities, like milk, can be divided in any proportion whatsoever; others, such as horses, cannot—only whole numbers will do. In the latter case, there is an inherent tension between the desire to obey the rule of proportion as closely as possible and the constraint restricting the size of each portion to discrete values. This results, at times, in unintuitive observations, or paradoxes. Several paradoxes related to apportionment, also called fair division, have been identified. In some cases, simple post facto adjustments, if allowed, to an apportionment methodology can resolve observed paradoxes. However, as shown by examples relating to the United States House of Representatives, and subsequently proven by the Balinski–Young theorem, mathematics alone cannot always provide a single, fair resolution to the apportionment of remaining fractions into discrete equal whole-number parts, while complying fully with all the competing fairness elements. (en)
  • Als Wählerzuwachsparadoxon (engl. Population-Paradox) wird folgende als paradox angesehene Konsequenz von Sitzzuteilungsverfahren bezeichnet: Stimmenzuwächse oder -verluste einer Partei bewirken eine Mandatsverschiebung zwischen zwei anderen Parteien. (de)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 491556 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 15523 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1121214703 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dcterms:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Als Wählerzuwachsparadoxon (engl. Population-Paradox) wird folgende als paradox angesehene Konsequenz von Sitzzuteilungsverfahren bezeichnet: Stimmenzuwächse oder -verluste einer Partei bewirken eine Mandatsverschiebung zwischen zwei anderen Parteien. (de)
  • An apportionment paradox exists when the rules for apportionment in a political system produce results which are unexpected or seem to violate common sense. To apportion is to divide into parts according to some rule, the rule typically being one of proportion. Certain quantities, like milk, can be divided in any proportion whatsoever; others, such as horses, cannot—only whole numbers will do. In the latter case, there is an inherent tension between the desire to obey the rule of proportion as closely as possible and the constraint restricting the size of each portion to discrete values. This results, at times, in unintuitive observations, or paradoxes. (en)
rdfs:label
  • Wählerzuwachsparadoxon (de)
  • Apportionment paradox (en)
rdfs:seeAlso
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
is dbo:wikiPageDisambiguates of
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License