Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Railings, C.
Right arrow Articles by Thrasher, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 41, No. 7, 1367-1393 (2004)
DOI: 10.1080/0042098042000214842

Reviews

Equalising Votes but Enabling Bias: The Electoral Impact of the 1977 and 1999 Ward Boundary Reviews in London

Colin Railings

Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK, crallings{at}plymouth.ac.uk

Ron Johnston

School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, University Road, Bristol, BS8 ISS, UK, R.Johnston{at}bristol.ac.uk

Michael Thrasher

Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK, michael.thrasher{at}plymouth.ac.uk

The boundaries of electoral units in Britain are periodically reviewed in order to enact the democratic principle of 'one person, one vote, one value'. The Commission-led reviews of local ward boundaries in London in the late 1970s and late 1990s both successfully reduced the variance in elector-councillor ratios within individual London boroughs and thereby helped to remove any bias in election outcomes stemming from malapportionment. However, other factors such as the efficiency with which a party's vote was distributed, the impact of differing levels of turnout and the intervention and success of third parties all remained crucial in determining the precise relationship between votes cast and seats won. It is impossible to ensure that all votes are equal under the 'first-past-the-post' system because these other components of electoral bias are either not subject to review, or amenable to manipulation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?