Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Evaluation of parties and coalitions with regard to party manifestos Andranik Tangian Hans-Böckler Foundation D-40476 Düsseldorf University of Karlsruhe D-76128 [email protected] 1 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 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 2 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 1.1 Introduction: Bundestagswahl 2005 SPD (social democrats) CDU/CSU (conservators) Green (ecologists) FDP (neoliberals) Left-Party (left social democrats & communists) 19 minor parties 3 % Votes 34.2 35.2 8.1 9.8 8.7 4.0 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 1.2 Introduction: Data (2005 on party manifestos) Opinions of parties and unions SPD CDU Green FDP Weighting LeftParty Unions Expert Google Relax the protection against dismissals No Yes No Yes No No 5 25300 Sector-dependent minimal wages Yes No Yes No No Yes 4 367 Statutory minimal wage Yes No Yes No Yes Yes 3 32500 Combined wages No Yes No No No No 3 54000 4 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 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 5 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 2.1 Model: Representativeness 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 7 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 3.1 Evaluation of parties: Indices 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 9 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 4.1 Evaluation of coalitions: Definitions Unanimity of a coalition is the weight of questions with unanimous opinions 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), 10 0≤p≤1 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 4.2 Evaluation of coalitions: Definitions (continued) Popularity of 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 11 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 4.3 Evaluation of coalitions: Indices 4.4 Evaluation of coalitions: Principal component analysis Principal components Popularity First axis 0.0568 Second axis -0.2327 Third axis -0.9709 Universality 0.2677 -0.9333 0.2394 0.9618 24.9417 0.2735 8.3166 -0.0093 3.3827 Unanimity Std deviation of w.r.t. axes 13 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 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 14 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 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 15 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 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 16 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 6.1 Remake for elections 2009 (Matthias Hölzlein) 17 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 6.2 Evaluation of the remake 2009 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 18 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 6.3 Electorate profile for 32 Wal-o-mat questions 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 19 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 6.4 Model 2009 for directly estimated electorate profiles 20 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 6.5 Evaluation 2009 for directly estimated electorate profiles 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? 21 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 7.1 Mathematical annex Notation q dichotomous questions μ {q } weights of q (probabilitymeasure) c candidates for election (parties) B {bqc }, bqc 1, matrix of candidate opinions ξ {c } candidate weights (probability votes received) a {aq } Bξ balance of opinions in the society a 1 abs(signa) vector of indicators of tie opinions a . b element-by-element product of vectors 22 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 7.2 Mathematical annex Definitions (parties) Representativeness: weight of protagonists if rqc weight of antagonists if Pc q rqc popularity of c bqc 1 bqc 1 q Uc 23 qrqc 05 q q round[rqc ] universality of c q Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 7.3 Mathematical annex Theorem 1 (indices of parties) 1 1 {Pc } (μ. a)B 2 2 1 1 1 {Uc } μ' a (μ signa)B 2 2 2 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 24 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 7.4 Mathematical annex Definitions (coalitions) C coalition (subset of candidates) C ξ c C C B {bqc C C c cC c C} matrix of member opinions C C b bq B ξ 25 c c C member weights balance of coalition opinions Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 7.5 Mathematical annex Theorem 2.1 (on coalitions) C Unanimity of C 1 μs C C 1 PC PC (1 p)(μ a) s .b 2 1 C C UC UC (1 p)(μ signa)' s b 2 where C C q s s sign n PC 26 C cC c Pc , cq b cC UC n is the number of members Pc weighted member indicators C cC c Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010 7.6 Mathematical annex Theorem 2.2 (on coalitions) If the coalition opinions on nonunanimous questions are independent (= independent negotiations on every question) then C C 1 2 2 2 V rC μ a . ' s 1 p b 4 C C 1 2 2 2 V round[rC ] μ signa . ' s 1 p b 4 27 Andranik Tangian. 10th Meeting of Society for SCW, Moscow, HSE 23.07.2010