Effective number of parties explained

In political science, the effective number of parties is a diversity index introduced by Laakso and Rein Taagepera (1979),^[1] which provides for an adjusted number of political parties in a country's party system, weighted by their relative size. The measure is especially useful when comparing party systems across countries.^[2]

The size of a party can be measured by either:

1. The effective number of electoral parties (ENEP) weights parties by their share of the vote.
2. The effective number of parliamentary parties (ENPP) weights parties by their share of seats in the legislature.

The number of parties equals the effective number of parties only when all parties have equal strength. In any other case, the effective number of parties is lower than the actual number of parties. The effective number of parties is a frequent operationalization for political fragmentation. Political concentration can seen as the share of power of large political parties.^[3]

There are several common alternatives for how to define the effective number of parties.^[4] John K. Wildgen's index of "hyperfractionalization" accords special weight to small parties.^[5] Juan Molinar's index gives special weight to the largest party.^[6] Dunleavy and Boucek provide a useful critique of the Molinar index.^[7]

Measures

Quadratic

Laakso and Taagepera (1979) were the first to define the effective number of parties using the following formula:

N = (1)/(\sum ^{n} _{i =1} p ^{2} _{i})

where n is the number of parties with at least one vote/seat and

p ^{2} _{i} the square of each party's proportion of all votes or seats. This is also the formula for the inverse Simpson index, or the true diversity of order 2. This definition is still the most commonly-used in political science.

This measure is equivalent to the Herfindahl–Hirschman index, used in economics; the Simpson diversity index in ecology; the inverse participation ratio (IPR) in physics; and the Rényi entropy of order

\alpha = 2 in information theory.^[8]

Alternatives

An alternative formula was proposed by Grigorii Golosov in 2010.^[9]

N = \sum ^{n} _{i =1} (p _{i})/(p _{i + p} ^{2} ^{i})

which is equivalent – if we only consider parties with at least one vote/seat – to

N = \sum ^{n} _{i =1} (1)/(1+ (p ^{2 /p} _{i) - p} _{i})

Here, n is the number of parties,

p ^{2} _{i} the square of each party's proportion of all votes or seats, and p ^{2} _{1} is the square of the largest party's proportion of all votes or seats.

Values

The following table illustrates the difference between the values produced by the two formulas for eight hypothetical vote or seat constellations:

Constellation	Largest component, fractional share	Other components, fractional shares	N, Laakso-Taagepera	N, Golosov
A	0.75	0.25	1.60	1.33
B	0.75	0.1, 15 at 0.01	1.74	1.42
C	0.55	0.45	1.98	1.82
D	0.55	3 at 0.1, 15 at 0.01	2.99	2.24
E	0.35	0.35, 0.3	2.99	2.90
F	0.35	5 at 0.1, 15 at 0.01	5.75	4.49
G	0.15	5 at 0.15, 0.1	6.90	6.89
H	0.15	7 at 0.1, 15 at 0.01	10.64	11.85

Seat product model

The effective number of parties can be predicted with the seat product model^{[10] [11]} as

N = (MS) ^{1/6} , where M is the district magnitude and S is the assembly size.

Effective number of parties by country

For individual countries the values of effective number of number of parliamentary parties (ENPP) for the last available election is shown.^[12] Some of the highest effective number of parties are in Brazil, Belgium, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. European Parliament has an even higher effective number of parties if national parties are considered, yet a much lower effective number of parties if political groups of the European Parliament are considered.

Country	Year	Effective number of parties
		2.18
		2.36
		2.06
		2.43
		3.04
		1.93
		3.15
		3.94
		1.42
		1.00
		9.70
		1.37
		1.38
		1.86
		2.28
		9.00
		1.94
		9.91
		4.73
		4.11
		2.20
		2.76
		4.13
		8.74
		4.90
		3.19
		4.81
		3.34
		7.24
		1.21
		2.75
		2.99
		4.52
		5.26
		2.63
		5.56
		3.72
		4.80
		2.37
		5.51
		2.01
		3.04
		3.09
		3.52
		1.92
		7.26
		2.06
		2.64
		2.06
		3.26
		1.84
		6.29
		2.17
		7.26
		5.98
		6.51
		2.40
		1.53
		2.69
		3.49
		6.14
		3.42
		6.44
		2.93
		4.84
		4.43
		5.19
		7.72
		1.97
		2.29
		2.13
		2.03
		1.00
		4.85
		5.68
		1.67
		2.16
		4.75
		7.03
		3.81
		3.85
		2.71
		3.25
		4.52
		5.56
		3.07
		2.68
		6.20
		3.13
		2.66
		4.30
		2.57
		1.65
		1.92
		4.63
		2.41
		2.96
		2.61
		2.90
		1.69
		1.92
		1.24
	2023	5.44
		3.04
		2.57
		2.09
		3.44
		2.10
		3.53
		5.18
		5.13
		2.38
		4.86
		3.02
	2020	1.99
		2.35
		2.34
		2.64
		2.39
		2.00
		3.31
		2.71
		2.35

References

1. Laakso . Markku . Taagepera . Rein. 1979. "Effective" Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe . Comparative Political Studies . en . 12 . 1 . 3–27 . 10.1177/001041407901200101. 143250203 . 0010-4140.
2. Lijphart, Arend (1999): Patterns of Democracy. New Haven/London: Yale UP
3. Avila-Cano . Antonio . Triguero-Ruiz . Francisco . Concentration of political power: Can we improve its measurement? . Comparative European Politics . 22 . 3 . 2024 . 1472-4790 . 10.1057/s41295-023-00365-1 . 389–407.
4. Book: Arend Lijphart . Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-seven Democracies, 1945–1990 . registration . 1 January 1994 . Oxford University Press . 978-0-19-827347-9 . 69. Arend Lijphart .
5. Web site: The Measurement of Hyperfractionalization . Cps.sagepub.com . 1971-07-01 . 2014-01-05.
6. 1963951. Counting the Number of Parties: An Alternative Index. Juan. Molinar. 1 January 1991. The American Political Science Review. 85. 4. 1383–1391. 10.2307/1963951. 154924401 .
7. 10.1177/1354068803009003002 . Constructing the Number of Parties . 2003 . Dunleavy . Patrick . Boucek . Françoise . Party Politics . 9 . 3 . 291–315 . 33028828 .
8. Bailey . Jack. 2024. "A Solution to the Seat-Product Problem . en . 10.33774/apsa-2024-1x8ft-v2.
9. Golosov. Grigorii V.. 2010. The Effective Number of Parties: A New Approach. Party Politics. en. 16. 2. 171–192. 10.1177/1354068809339538. 144503915. 1354-0688.
10. Taagepera, Rein (2007). "Predicting Party Sizes". Oxford University Press
11. The Seat Product Model of the effective number of parties: A case for applied political science . 10.1016/j.electstud.2015.10.011 . 2016 . Li . Yuhui . Shugart . Matthew S. . Electoral Studies . 41 . 23–34 .
12. Web site: Election Indices .

External links

• Michael Gallagher providing data on the Laakso-Taagepera effective number of parties for over 900 elections in over 100 countries
• Average effective number of parties (Golosov) for 183 democratic party systems and non-systems, 1792–2009, reported in Golosov, Grigorii V., "Towards a Classification of the World's Democratic Party Systems, Step 1: Identifying the Units", Party Politics, Vol. 19, No. 1, January 2013, pp. 134–138.
• How to compute Golosov’s effective number of parties in Excel