The Science Behind Elections: A Comprehensive Look at Voting Systems and Their Drawbacks
In 2024, approximately 60 national elections will take place worldwide, involving two billion people. Among these, the high-stakes national elections in India and the U.S. presidential election are of particular interest. Despite the apparent chaos and volatility of elections, there’s a science behind the processes. This article explores the history of voting systems, the ‘first-past-the-post’ (FPTP) system, and alternatives like the Condorcet and Borda systems. We will also delve into the drawbacks of these methods and the role of mathematics and physics in enhancing the fairness of elections.
The earliest form of elections can be traced back to ancient Athens, where candidates’ luck played a significant role in the selection process. However, around 10th-century Chola inscriptions at Uthiramerur in Tamil Nadu reveal a more sophisticated approach: the ‘Kudavolai’ system. In this method, village representatives were chosen randomly from a pool of candidates voted for by the people.
THE ‘FIRST PAST THE POST’ SYSTEM
In modern times, the FPTP system is commonly used. Critics, however, have pointed out significant flaws in this method. For instance, in the 2015 Delhi Assembly elections, the Aam Aadmi Party received 54% of the popular vote but secured 96% of the seats. Simultaneously, the Bharatiya Janata Party won 32% and 4%, respectively, reflecting a disproportionate difference.
Moreover, the FPTP system has another drawback. Winning candidates often secure far less than 50% of the total votes. In the case of India and the U.K., no government, irrespective of its parliamentary seat strength, has ever surpassed 50% vote share. This raises concerns about the true representation of the voters’ preferences.
THE CONDORCET AND BORDA SYSTEMS
As an alternative, the Condorcet method requires the winning candidate to receive more than 50% of the votes when compared with each competitor. Although an improvement over the FPTP system, it is still not employed in national elections due to its complexity. Smaller organizations, however, do utilize it for electing their leaders and board members.
Another alternative, the Borda system, lets voters rank each candidate, awarding points based on the ranking. Subsequently, the candidate with the highest score wins. The President of India and some smaller organizations use this system. However, rank-based voting systems may conflict with certain fairness criteria, as stipulated by Kenneth Arrow’s theorem.
CONCLUSION
While mathematics and statistical physics provide valuable insights into election processes, the inherent boisterousness of elections calls for a physics perspective. This approach, based on the central lesson of statistical physics, helps diagnose electoral malpractices and ensure fairness, even amidst the chaos and superficial disorder surrounding elections. The science of elections continues to evolve, but the 2024 elections offer hope for fair and accurate results, ultimately putting the power into the hands of millions of people worldwide.