Editing Parallel voting (section)

== Use ==
===Current use===
Parallel voting is currently used in the following countries:<ref>Reynolds et al. (2008), ''Electoral System Design: The New International IDEA Handbook'', Sweden: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, pg. 30–33</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! rowspan="2" |Country
! rowspan="2" |Body
! colspan="3" |Members elected in constituencies
! colspan="3" |Members elected by proportional representation
! colspan="3" |Other members
|-
!Total
!%
!System
!Total
!%
!System
!Total
!System
!%
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Andorra}} [[Elections in Andorra|Andorra]]'''
|[[General Council (Andorra)|General Council]]
|14
|50%
|[[General ticket|PBV]]
|14
|50%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
| rowspan="4" | '''{{Flagicon|Argentina}} [[Elections in Argentina|Argentina]]'''
|'''{{Flagicon|Córdoba}}''' [[Legislature of Córdoba|Legislature of Córdoba Province]]
|26
|37%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|44
|63%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|Río Negro Province}}''' [[Legislature of Río Negro|Legislature of Río Negro Province]]
|24
|52%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|22
|48%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|San Juan}}''' [[Chamber of Deputies of San Juan]]
|19
|53%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|17
|47%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|Santa Cruz}}''' [[Chamber of Deputies of Santa Cruz]]
|14
|58%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|10
|42%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Guinea}} [[Elections in Guinea|Guinea]]'''
|[[National Assembly (Guinea)|National Assembly]]
|38
|33%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|76
|67%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]] ([[Hare quota]])
|
|
|
|-
| rowspan="2" | '''{{Flagicon|Japan}} [[Elections in Japan|Japan]]'''
|[[House of Representatives (Japan)|House of Representatives]]|| 289 
|62%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]|| 176
|38%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]||
|
|
|-
|[[House of Councillors]]
|147
|60%
|[[Single non-transferable vote|SNTV]]
|98
|40%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|Kazakhstan}} [[Elections in Kazakhstan|Kazakhstan]]'''
|[[Mazhilis|Majilis]]
|69
|30%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|69
|70%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|Kyrgyzstan}} [[Elections in Kyrgyzstan|Kyrgyzstan]]'''
|[[Supreme Council (Kyrgyzstan)|Supreme Council]]
|36
|40%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|54
|60%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Lithuania}} [[Elections in Lithuania|Lithuania]]'''
|[[Seimas]]
|71
|50%
|[[Two-round system|TRS]]
|70
|50%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]] ([[largest remainder method]]): [[Open list|open lists]]
|
|
|
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Mexico}}''' '''[[Elections in Mexico|Mexico]]'''
|[[Chamber of Deputies of Mexico|Chamber of Deputies]]|| 300 
|60%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]|| 200
|40%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]] ([[Hare quota]])||
|
|
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Mongolia}}''' '''[[Elections in Mongolia|Mongolia]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=Smith |first=Marissa |title=Parliamentary Elections 2024: Yet Another New Election System |url=https://blogs.ubc.ca/mongolia/2024/yet-another-new-election-system/ |access-date=2024-04-19 |website=Mongolia Focus |publisher=University of British Columbia |language=en-US}}</ref>'''
|[[State Great Khural]]||78
|62%
|[[Block plurality voting|BPV]]|| 48
|38%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]: [[Closed list|closed lists]]||
|
|
|-
|  '''{{Flagicon|Nepal}}''' '''[[Elections in Nepal|Nepal]]'''
|[[House of Representatives (Nepal)|House of Representatives]]
|165
|60%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|110
|40%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]: [[Closed list|closed lists]]
|
|
|
|-
| rowspan="2" | {{Flagicon|Philippines}} '''[[Elections in the Philippines|Philippines]]'''
|[[House of Representatives of the Philippines|House of Representatives]]|| 253 
|80%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]|| 63
|20%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]] ([[Hare quota]]): [[Closed list|closed lists]]||
|
|
|-
|[[Bangsamoro Parliament]]
|32
|40%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|40
|50%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|8
|
|10%
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Russian Federation}} [[Elections in Russia|Russian Federation]]'''
|[[State Duma]]|| 225 
|50%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]|| 225<ref>{{Cite news|url = https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/world/europe/putin-orders-new-system-for-russian-parliamentary-elections.html|title = Putin Orders New System for Russian Parliamentary Elections - NYTimes.com| work=The New York Times |date = 2013-01-03|access-date = 2014-09-09| last1=Herszenhorn | first1=David M. }}</ref><ref>Since the 2016 election, and from 1993 to the [[2003 Russian legislative election|2003 election]].</ref>
|50%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]] ([[Hare quota]]): [[Closed list|closed lists]]||
|
|
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Senegal}} [[Elections in Senegal|Senegal]]'''
|[[National Assembly (Senegal)|National Assembly]]
|105
|64%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|60
|36%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]] ([[largest remainder method]])
|
|
|
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|South Ossetia}} [[Elections in South Ossetia|South Ossetia]]'''
|[[Parliament of South Ossetia|Parliament]]
|17
|50%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|17
|50%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|Taiwan}} [[Elections in Taiwan|Taiwan]] (Republic of China)'''
|[[Legislative Yuan]]
|73
|65%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|34
|30%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|6
|[[Single non-transferable vote|SNTV]] for indigenous seats
|5%
|-
|'''{{Flagicon|Tajikistan}} [[Elections in Tajikistan|Tajikistan]]'''
|[[Assembly of Representatives (Tajikistan)|Assembly of Representatives]]
|41
|65%
|[[Two-round system|TRS]]
|22
|35%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|
|
|
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Tanzania}} [[Elections in Tanzania|Tanzania]]<ref>{{cite web |title=Art. 66, Constitution of Tanzania |url=https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Tanzania_1995?lang=en#857 |website=Constitute Project}}</ref>'''
|[[National Assembly (Tanzania)|National Assembly]]
|264
|67%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|113 
|29%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]
|26
|5 via indirect elections, 11 nominated by the president, including the attorney general.
|4%
|-
| '''{{Flagicon|Thailand}} [[Elections in Thailand|Thailand]]'''
|[[House of Representatives (Thailand)|House of Representatives]]|| 400
|80%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]|| 100
|20%
|[[Party-list proportional representation|List PR]]||
|
|
|}
{| class="wikitable"
|+For dependencies
! rowspan="2" |Country
! rowspan="2" |Body
! colspan="3" |Members elected in constituencies
! colspan="3" |Members elected by proportional representation
! colspan="3" |Other members
|-
!Total
!%
!System
!Total
!%
!System
!Total
!System
!%
|-
|'''''Realm of New Zealand'''''
|{{Flagicon|Niue}} [[Elections in Niue|Niue]] [[Niue Assembly|Assembly]]
|14
|70%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|6
|30%
|[[Plurality block voting|Plurality block voting (BV)]]
|
|
|
|-
| rowspan="3" |'''''British overseas territories'''''
|{{Flagicon|Anguilla}} [[Elections in Anguilla|Anguilla]] [[Anguilla House of Assembly|House of Assembly]]
|7
|54%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|4
|31%
|[[Plurality block voting|Plurality block voting (BV)]]
|2
|2 ''ex officio''
|15%
|-
|{{Flagicon|Turks and Caicos Islands}} [[Elections in the Turks and Caicos Islands|Turks and Caicos Islands]] [[House of Assembly (Turks and Caicos Islands)|House of Assembly]]
|10
|48%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|5
|24%
|[[Plurality block voting|Plurality block voting (BV)]]
|6
|4 appointed, 2 ''ex officio''
|28%
|-
|{{Flagicon|British Virgin Islands}} [[Elections in the British Virgin Islands|British Virgin Islands]] [[House of Assembly of the British Virgin Islands|House of Assembly]]
|9
|60%
|[[First-past-the-post voting|FPTP]]
|4
|27%
|[[Plurality block voting|Plurality block voting (BV)]]
|2
|2 ''ex officio''
|13%
|}

==== Philippines ====
The Philippines' electoral system for Congress is an exceptional case. Political parties running for party-list seats are legally required to be completely separate from those running in constituency seats. Furthermore, political parties are capped at 3 seats (out of 20% of seats, or about 60 seats). As a result, the mixed-member system utilized in the Philippines is not representative at all of the share of the vote that "normal" political parties obtain (even amongst mixed-member majoritarian systems), let alone for those in full proportional representation systems.

=== Hybrid use and similar systems ===

* '''[[Hungary]]''''s [[National Assembly (Hungary)|National Assembly]] uses a system where the parallel voting component shares a pool of seats (93) with the vote transfer system and with the minority list seats with a reduced entry threshold. This means the number of seats effectively assigned proportionally based on the parallel party list votes is unknown/unknowable before the election takes place.<ref>Political Capital (2012) The new electoral law in Hungary - In-depth analysis http://www.valasztasirendszer.hu/wp-content/uploads/PC_ElectoralSystem_120106.pdf</ref>
* '''Italy''': Starting with the [[2018 Italian general election|2018 election]], both houses of the [[Italian parliament]] are elected using a system similar to parallel voting. 62.5% of the seats are assigned proportionally to party lists; party lists are also linked in coalitions supporting constituency candidates running for the remaining 37.5% of the available seats, who are elected by means of a first-past-the-post system. Electors have a single vote with two-fold effects for a party list (proportional) and its associated local candidate (majoritarian). Split-ticket voting is not allowed, a voter may mark their ballots only next to a list, a candidate, or a list and a candidate associated with it and all of these votes has the same effect. If a voter marks a candidate not associated with the list they marked, like voters may under parallel voting, the vote is invalid under the Italian system.
* '''Jersey (UK)'''
* '''Monaco'''
* '''Mexico''': In contrast to the parallel voting system for the Chamber of Deputies, for electing the Chamber of Senators (upper house), a single (party list) vote is used similarly to the Italian system. However, constituencies have 3 seats with a type of limited (party block) voting being used: 2 seats are given to the largest party and 1 to the second largest party. [[Party-list proportional representation|Party-list PR]] is used for the nationwide seats.
* '''Pakistan'''
* '''Seychelles'''

===Former use===
* [[Albania]] used parallel voting in the 1996 and 1997 elections (before switching to [[mixed-member proportional representation]] from 2001 to [[2005 Albanian parliamentary election|2005]]).{{sfnm |1a1=Gallagher |1y=2011 |1p=185 |2a1=Gallagher |2y=2014 |2p=18}}<ref>{{cite web |last=Lublin |first=David |title=Albania |website=Election Passport|url=http://www.electionpassport.com/electoral-systems/albania/ |publisher=American University |access-date=24 March 2016}}</ref>
* Argentina: [[Santiago del Estero Province]] (1997–2009)
* [[Armenia]]
* [[Azerbaijan]]'s [[Azerbaijan's National Assembly|National Assembly]] (the Milli Məclis) had previously used an SM system in which 100 members were elected for five-year terms in single-seat constituencies and 25 were members were elected by proportional representation. Since the latest election Azerbaijan has returned to electing members from single-member constituencies. Due to the corruption present within Azerbaijan,<ref>Election Rigging and How to Fight It ''Journal of Democracy'' - Volume 17, Number 3, July 2006, pp. 138-151.</ref> the limited proportionality that SM was able to offer had little effect.
*[[Bulgaria]] (1990, 2009)
* [[Croatia]] (1993&ndash;2001)
* [[Egypt]] (2020)
* [[Georgia (country)|Georgia]] (1990–2024): Georgia initially used a two-round system for its constituency seats. Up until 2016, 73 seats out of 150 seats were allocated in constituencies. In the 2020 election, this number was reduced to 30 out of 150 as a result of the [[2019 protests in Georgia (country)|2019 protests]]. By 2024, Georgia will switch to a fully proportional electoral system.<ref>{{cite news|title=Key Points of Newly Adopted Constitution|url=http://civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=30474|access-date=27 September 2017|work=Civil Georgia|date=27 September 2017}}</ref>
* [[Italy]] (1993&ndash;2005, with modifications)
* [[Elections in North Macedonia|North Macedonia]] (1998)
* [[Palestinian Authority]] ([[2005 Palestinian presidential election|2005]]), for the [[2014 Palestinian general election|next election]], the system was changed to [[party-list proportional representation]].
*[[South Korea]]: (1988-2024) [[National Assembly (South Korea)|National Assembly]] used parallel voting from 1988 to 2019. From 2019 to 2024, it uses a hybrid system of parallel voting and mixed-member proportional, with both compensatory seats (30) and supplementary seats (17).
*[[Ukraine]]: In the [[2019 Ukrainian parliamentary election|last elections]] to the [[Verkhovna Rada]], a parallel voting system was used. 50% of seats are distributed under party lists with a 5% [[election threshold]] and 50% through [[first-past-the-post]] in [[Single-member constituency|single-member constituencies]]. The method of 50/50 mixed elections was used in the 2002, 2012, 2014 and 2019 elections; however, in 2006 and 2007, the elections were held under a proportional system only. According to the election law that became valid on 1 January 2020 the [[Next Ukrainian parliamentary election|next election]] to the Verkhovna Rada again will be held under a proportional scheme.
===Proposals for use===
In [[New Zealand]], the [[Royal Commission on the Electoral System]] reviewed the electoral system in 1985–86 and considered parallel voting as a possible replacement for the [[First-past-the-post|single-member plurality (SMP)]] system in use at the time.

The commission came to the conclusion that parallel voting would be unable to overcome the shortcomings of New Zealand's previous SMP system. The total seats won by a party would likely remain out of proportion to its share of votes—there would be a "considerable imbalance between share of the votes and share of the total seats"—and it would be unfair to minor parties (who would struggle to win constituency seats).<ref name="rc392">Royal Commission on Electoral Systems (1986), ''Report of the Royal Commission on the Electoral System: towards a better democracy'', Wellington N.Z.: Government Printing, pg. 39.</ref> In the [[Electoral reform in New Zealand|indicative 1992 electoral referendum]], parallel voting was one of four choices for an alternative electoral system (alongside [[Mixed-member proportional representation|MMP]], [[Instant-runoff voting|AV]] and [[Single transferable vote|STV]]), but came last with only 5.5 percent of the vote. An overwhelming majority of voters supported MMP, as recommended by the Royal Commission, and the system was adopted after the [[1993 electoral referendum]].

In [[2011 New Zealand voting method referendum|another referendum in 2011]], 57.77% of voters elected to keep current the MMP system. Among the 42.23% that voted to change to another system, a plurality (46.66%) preferred a return to the pre-1994 SMP system. Parallel voting was the second-most popular choice, with 24.14% of the vote.{{Cn|date=August 2024}}{{Portal|Politics}}