{{Short description|Personalized list proportional voting system}} {{Use Oxford spelling|date=September 2017}} {{Use dmy dates|date=February 2026}} {{Electoral systems}} thumb|359x359px|Countries using open-list proportional representation as of 2020.{{legend|#00e32d|Countries where all parties use an open list}}{{legend|#ff8400|Countries where most parties use an open list<ref name="Achury"/>}}{{legend|#00a8e6|Varies by state}} '''Open list''' describes any variant of party-list proportional representation where voters have at least some influence on the order in which a party's candidates are elected. This is as opposed to closed list, in which party lists are in a predetermined, fixed order by the time of the election and gives the general voter no influence at all on the position of the candidates placed on the party list.
An open list system allows voters to select individuals rather than, or in addition to parties. Different systems give the voter different amounts of influence to change the default ranking. The voter's candidate choices are usually called '''preference vote'''; the voters are usually allowed one or more preference votes for the open list candidates.
Open lists differ from mixed-member proportional representation, also known as personalized proportional representation in Germany. Some mixed electoral systems may use open lists in their list-proportional representation component. Open lists can increase the personalization of politics due to intra- and inter-party electoral competition,<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Arter |first=David |date=2014 |title=Clowns, ‘Alluring Ducks’ and ‘Miss Finland 2009’: The Value of ‘Celebrity Candidates’ in an Open-List Pr Voting System |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2014.982693 |journal=Representation |volume=50 |issue=4 |pages=453–470 |doi=10.1080/00344893.2014.982693 |issn=0034-4893|url-access=subscription }}</ref> as well as identity politics.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Kunovich |first=Sheri |date=2012 |title=Unexpected Winners: The Significance of an Open-List System on Women's Representation in Poland |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-gender/article/abs/unexpected-winners-the-significance-of-an-openlist-system-on-womens-representation-in-poland/DD473A04C8BCAFFC100E12FACAA6BF9F |journal=Politics & Gender |language=en |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=153–177 |doi=10.1017/S1743923X12000141 |issn=1743-9248|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
==Relatively closed variants== A relatively closed open list system is one where a candidate must reach a full electoral quota of votes on their own to be assured of winning a seat. The total number of seats won by the party minus the number of its candidates that achieved this quota gives the number of unfilled seats. These are then successively allocated to the party's not-yet-elected candidates who were ranked highest on the party list.
=== Iceland === In both parliamentary and municipal elections, voters may alter the order of the party list or strike candidates from the list completely. How many votes need to be altered in this way to have an effect on the results varies by the number of seats won by the party in the constituency or municipality in question and the candidate's place on the list.<ref>{{cite web |title=Hvað þurfa margir að strika út mann til að hann færist niður? |url=https://www.landskjor.is/kosningamal/kosningakerfi/nr/79 |website=Landskjörstjórn |access-date=28 May 2022 |archive-date=28 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220528204754/https://www.landskjor.is/kosningamal/kosningakerfi/nr/79 |url-status=live }}</ref> In the parliamentary elections of 2007 and 2009, voters altered the party lists enough to change the ranking of candidates within party lists; however, this did not affect which candidates ultimately got elected to parliament.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Helgason |first1=Þorkell |title=Greining á úthlutun þingsæta eftir alþingiskosningarnar 27. apríl 2013 |url=https://www.landskjor.is/media/frettir/Greining2013nov.pdf |publisher=Landskjörstjórn |access-date=28 May 2022 |archive-date=24 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220124090128/https://www.landskjor.is/media/frettir/Greining2013nov.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>
==More open variants== In a "more open" list system, the quota for election of an individual representative could be lowered from the above amount. It is then possible that more of a party's candidates achieve this quota than the total seats won by the party. It should therefore be made clear in advance whether list ranking or absolute votes take precedence in that case. The quota for individuals is usually specified either as a percentage of the party list quota, or as a percentage of the total votes received by the party. In one example, the quota is 1,000 votes and the open list threshold is specified as 25% of the quota, i.e. 250 votes. Therefore, a party that received 5,000 votes wins five seats, which are awarded to its list candidates as follows. {| class="wikitable" |- ! Candidate position<br />on the list ! Preference votes ! 25% of the quota ! Elected |- | 1 | 3,500 | x (first) | x |- | 2 | 50 | | x |- | 3 | 150 | | x |- | 4 | 250 | x (third) | x |- | 5 | 100 | | |- | 6 | 100 | | |- | 7 | 450 | x (second) | x |- | 8 | 50 | | |- | colspan="4" |<math>\vdots</math> |}
Candidates No. 1, 7, and 4 have each achieved 25% of the quota (250 preference votes or more). They get the first three of the five seats the party has won. The other two seats will be taken by No. 2 and 3, the two highest remaining positions on the party list. This means that No. 5 is not elected even though being the fifth on the list and having more preference votes than No. 2. In practice, with such a strict threshold, only very few candidates succeed to precede on their lists as the required number of votes is huge. Where the threshold is lower (e.g. in Czech parliamentary elections, 5% of the total party vote is the required minimum), results defying the original list order are much more common. Parties usually allow candidates to ask for preference votes, but without campaigning negatively against other candidates on the list. In some countries individual political parties can choose if their list is open or closed.<ref name="Achury">{{Cite journal |last=Achury |first=Susan |last2=Ramírez |first2=Margarita |last3=Cantú |first3=Francisco |date=2017 |title=Endogenous ballot structures: The selection of open and closed lists in Colombia’s legislative elections |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379416304930 |journal=Electoral Studies |volume=49 |pages=136–154 |doi=10.1016/j.electstud.2017.06.006 |issn=0261-3794|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
=== Austria ===
The members of the National Council are elected by open list proportional representation in nine multi-member constituencies based on the states (with varying in size from 7 to 36 seats) and 39 districts. Voters are able to cast a single party vote and one preference votes each on the federal, state and electoral district level for their preferred candidates within that party. The thresholds for a candidate to move up the list are 7% of the candidate's party result on the federal level, 10% on the state level and 14% on the electoral district level.<ref>[https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/hlpd/public/content/32/Seite.320260.html Vorzugsstimmenvergabe bei einer Nationalratswahl ("''Preferential voting in a federal election''")] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190302115618/https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/hlpd/public/content/32/Seite.320260.html |date=2019-03-02 }} HELP.gv.at</ref> Candidates for the district level are listed on the ballot while voters need to write-in their preferred candidate on state and federal level.
=== Croatia ===
In Croatia, the voter can give their vote to a single candidate on the list, but only candidates who have received at least 10% of the party's votes take precedence over the other candidates on the list.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.zakon.hr/z/355/Zakon-o-izborima-zastupnika-u-Hrvatski-sabor | title=Zakon o izborima zastupnika u Hrvatski sabor (Act on Election of Representatives to the Croatian Parliament) | language=hr | access-date=August 27, 2018 | archive-date=August 28, 2018 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180828035834/https://www.zakon.hr/z/355/Zakon-o-izborima-zastupnika-u-Hrvatski-sabor | url-status=live }}</ref>
=== Czech Republic ===
In Czech parliamentary elections, voters are given 4 preference votes. Only candidates who have received more than 5% of preferential votes at the regional level take precedence over the list.<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2083_B.htm | title=IPU PARLINE database: Czech Republic (Poslanecka Snemovna), Electoral system | access-date=2018-08-27 | archive-date=2021-02-24 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210224091611/http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2083_B.htm | url-status=live }}</ref> For elections to the European Parliament, the procedure is identical but each voter is only allowed 2 preference votes.
=== Indonesia === {{main|Elections in Indonesia}} In Indonesia, any candidate who has obtained at least 30% of the quota is automatically elected.<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2147_B.htm | title=IPU PARLINE database: INDONESIA (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat), Electoral system | access-date=2018-08-27 | archive-date=2018-10-16 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181016132843/http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2147_B.htm | url-status=live }}</ref>{{Update inline|date=February 2024|reason=This isn't mentioned in the most recent Indonesian electoral law of 2017.}}
=== Netherlands === In the Netherlands, the voter can give their vote to any candidate in a list (for example, in elections for the House of Representatives); the vote for this candidate is called a "preference vote" (''voorkeurstem'' in Dutch). Candidates with at least 25% of the quota takes priority over the party's other candidates who stand higher on the party list but received fewer preference votes. Most people vote for the top candidate, to indicate no special preference for any individual candidate, but support for the party in general; however, people sometimes want to express their support for a particular person. For example, some people vote for the first woman on the list. If a candidate gathers enough preference votes, then they get a seat in parliament, even if their position on the list would leave them without a seat. In the 2003 elections Hilbrand Nawijn, the former minister of migration and integration, was elected into parliament for the Pim Fortuyn List by preference votes even though he was the last candidate on the list.
=== Slovakia ===
In Slovakia, each voter may, in addition to the party, select one to four candidates from the ordered party list. Candidates who are selected by more than 3% of the party's voters are elected (in order of total number of votes) first and only then is the party ordering used. For European elections, voters select two candidates and the candidates must have more than 10% of the total votes to override the party list. In the European election in 2009 three of Slovakia's thirteen MEPs were elected solely by virtue of preference votes (having party-list positions too low to have won otherwise) and only one (Katarína Neveďalová of SMER) was elected solely by virtue of her position on the party list (having fewer preference votes than a number of other candidates who themselves, nevertheless had preferences from fewer than 10 percent of their party's voters).
=== Sweden ===
In Sweden, a person needs to receive 5% of the party's votes for the personal vote to overrule the ordering on the party list.<ref>Swedish Election Authority: [http://www.val.se/pdf/electionsinsweden_webb.pdf Elections in Sweden: The way its done] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090225072954/http://www.val.se/pdf/electionsinsweden_webb.pdf |date=2009-02-25 }} (page 16)</ref> Voting without expressing a preference between individuals is possible, although the parties urge their voters to support the party's prime candidate, to protect them from being beaten by someone ranked lower by the party. The share of voters using the open list option at 2022 Swedish general election was 22.49%.<ref>[https://www.val.se/servicelankar/otherlanguages/englishengelska/electionresults/electionresults2022.4.14c1f613181ed0043d5583f.html 2022 Swedish election results, Section: Voting patterns, Personal votes in Riksdag elections (number), 2022, The Swedish electoral authority]</ref>
==Most open variant== thumb|right|Finnish parliamentary election uses the open list method. Here an official poster rack in central Helsinki displays the candidates and their assigned ballot numbers by party. [[File:Valsedel Finland riksdagsval 2011.jpg|thumb|Ballot during the Finnish parliamentary election of 2011]] [[File:Tamuratomoko-uenoparkexit-e-july2-2016.jpg|thumb|right|A campaign bus in Tokyo for (successful) Communist proportional candidate Tomoko Tamura in Japan's 2016 Councillors election. Tamura received roughly half of her votes in Tokyo, other proportional candidates on the same list won most of their votes in other prefectures.<ref>Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications: [http://www.soumu.go.jp/senkyo/senkyo_s/data/sangiin24/index.html Results of the 24th regular election of members of the House of Councillors] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190410170451/http://www.soumu.go.jp/senkyo/senkyo_s/data/sangiin24/index.html |date=2019-04-10 }}: [http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000430619.xls Proportional election, Japanese Communist Party results (lists preference votes by candidate and prefecture)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170831221206/http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000430619.xls |date=2017-08-31 }} {{in lang|ja}}</ref> The proportional district is nationwide; but limited by a very short legal campaign period, some proportional candidates focus their campaign efforts on only certain regions where they personally or their party have a local base.]]
The most-open list, fully-open list, or simply open list system is one where the number of votes for each candidate fully determines the order of election. This system is used in all Finnish, Latvian, and Brazilian multiple-seat elections. Since 2001, lists of this "most open" type have also been used in the elections to fill the 96 proportional seats in the 242-member upper house of Japan.{{citation needed|date=July 2024}}
==Free lists or panachage== {{Main|Panachage}}
A "free list", more usually called panachage or mixed list, is a variant on the most open list where voters may support candidates on ''different'' lists. Candidates are typically elected using either cumulative or block plurality voting. This gives the voters full control over which candidates are elected, not just within a particular party, but even across them. As a result, independents are not forced to support candidates of only one party, and can support candidates across multiple lists, while still ensuring the results are ultimately proportional.<ref>"[http://www.aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esd/esd02/esd02e/esd02e03 Open, closed, and free lists]{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210112055019/http://www.aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esd/esd02/esd02e/esd02e03 |date=2021-01-12 }}", ''ACE Electoral Knowledge Network''</ref> It is used in elections at all levels in Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, and Switzerland, in congressional elections in Ecuador, El Salvador, and Honduras, as well as in local elections in a majority of German states, in French communes with under 1,000 inhabitants, and in Czech municipal elections.{{citation needed|date=July 2024}}
==Ballot format==
Some ways to operate an open list system when using traditional paper-based voting are as follows: *One method (used in Belgium and the Netherlands) is to have a large ballot paper with a box for each party and sub-boxes for the various candidates. In Belgium, when electronic voting is used (in Flanders and Ostbelgien), the voter has to choose with an electronic pencil on a touchscreen between lists and blank vote, then on the list's page between the top box (vote for the list without preference for specific candidates) or the box(es) for one or several candidates on the same list.<ref>{{in lang|fr}} « [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sWrV4S-P4c Voilà comment voter électroniquement avec Smartmatic] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160923093747/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sWrV4S-P4c |date=2016-09-23 }} », video posted on Youtube by the Belgian Federal Interior Ministry</ref> *Another method (used in Slovakia and Spain) is to have a separate ballot paper for each party. To maintain voter secrecy, the voter is handed ballot papers for every party. The voter chooses the candidates (or may vote for the party as a whole) on one of the ballot papers, for example, by drawing circles around the candidate numbers (which is why casting preference votes is called ''circling'' in the Czech Republic and Slovakia). Then, the voter puts the party ballot paper into an envelope and puts the envelope into the ballot box.{{citation needed|date=February 2025}} * In Brazil, each candidate is assigned a number (in which the first 2 digits are the party number and the others the candidate's number within the party). The voting machine has a telephone-like panel where the voter presses the buttons for the number of their chosen candidate. In Finland, each candidate is assigned a 3-digit number.{{citation needed|date=February 2025}} * In Italy, the voter must write the name of each chosen candidate in blank boxes under the party box.{{citation needed|date=February 2025}}
==Use==
=== By country === Some of these states may use other systems in addition to an open list, for example first-past-the-post in individual constituencies. Some countries use open list may only be used in one of the chambers of the legislature.
==== Africa ==== {{div col|colwidth=20em}} *{{flag|Democratic Republic of the Congo}}<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2375_B.htm | title=IPU PARLINE database: DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO (Assemblée nationale), Electoral system | access-date=2018-08-19 | archive-date=2021-02-24 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210224070537/http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2375_B.htm | url-status=live }}</ref> {{div col end}}
==== Americas ==== {{div col|colwidth=20em}} *{{flag|Brazil}}<ref name="mainw">{{cite journal | url=http://kellogg.nd.edu/publications/workingpapers/WPS/141.pdf | title=Politicians, Parties, and Electoral Systems: Brazil in Comparative Perspective | author=Mainwaring, Scott | journal=Comparative Politics | date=October 1991 | volume=24 | issue=1 | pages=21–43 | doi=10.2307/422200 | jstor=422200 | access-date=2012-08-01 | archive-date=2016-05-08 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160508120102/http://kellogg.nd.edu/publications/workingpapers/WPS/141.pdf | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Chile}}<ref name="mainw"/> *{{flag|Colombia}}<ref group=CEPPS name=colombia/> *{{flag|Ecuador}}<ref>Craig Arceneaux, ''Democratic Latin Americ''a, Routledge, 2015 {{ISBN|978-1-317-34882-5}} [https://books.google.com/books?id=86DhCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT339 p.339] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210225011125/https://books.google.com/books?id=86DhCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT339 |date=2021-02-25 }}</ref> *{{flag|El Salvador}}<ref>George Rodriguez, "[http://www.ticotimes.net/2015/02/28/voters-head-to-the-polls-in-el-salvador-to-elect-legislators-mayors Voters head to the polls in El Salvador to elect legislators, mayors] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210507221652/http://www.ticotimes.net/2015/02/28/voters-head-to-the-polls-in-el-salvador-to-elect-legislators-mayors |date=2021-05-07 }}", ''Tico Times'', 28 February 2015</ref><ref>{{in lang|es}} "[http://es.calameo.com/read/001686636ac80aa84289b Papeletas para las elecciones 2015] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210227055350/http://es.calameo.com/read/001686636ac80aa84289b |date=2021-02-27 }} (reproduction of ballot papers and explanation of the new voting system)", ''Tribunal Supremo Electoral''</ref><ref>[http://ps.ucdavis.edu/people/mshugart Matthew S. Shugart] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210224123337/http://ps.ucdavis.edu/people/mshugart |date=2021-02-24 }}, "[https://fruitsandvotes.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/el-salvador-joins-the-panachage-ranks-presidents-party-holds-steady/ El Salvador joins the panachage ranks, president's party holds steady] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210228150440/https://fruitsandvotes.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/el-salvador-joins-the-panachage-ranks-presidents-party-holds-steady/ |date=2021-02-28 }}", ''Fruits and Votes'', 8 March 2015</ref> *{{flag|Honduras}}<ref>"[http://www.electionpassport.com/electoral-systems/honduras/ Honduras] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210424021246/http://www.electionpassport.com/electoral-systems/honduras/ |date=2021-04-24 }}", ''Election Passport''</ref> *{{flag|Panama}}<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2245_B.htm | title=IPU PARLINE database: PANAMA (Asamblea Nacional), Electoral system | access-date=2018-08-19 | archive-date=2022-04-07 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220407064215/http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2245_B.htm | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Peru}}<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/countries/id/170/ | title=IFES Election Guide | Country Profile: Peru | access-date=2018-08-19 | archive-date=2021-04-22 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210422043153/http://www.electionguide.org/countries/id/170/ | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Suriname}}<ref>"http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2299_B.htm {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180715064357/http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2299_B.htm |date=2018-07-15 }}"</ref> {{div col end}}
==== Asia-Pacific ==== {{div col|colwidth=20em}} *{{flag|Fiji}}<ref>{{cite web|author=Fijan elections office|url=http://www.electionsfiji.gov.fj/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Electoral-Decree-2014.pdf|access-date=3 July 2014|title=Electoral decree 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714162747/http://www.electionsfiji.gov.fj/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Electoral-Decree-2014.pdf|archive-date=14 July 2014}}</ref> *{{flag|Indonesia}}<ref group=CEPPS name=indo/> *{{flag|Japan}} for House of Councillors elections<ref>:ja:非拘束名簿式</ref> *{{flag|Jordan}}<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2163_B.htm | title=IPU PARLINE database: JORDAN (Majlis Al-Nuwaab), Electoral system | access-date=2018-08-19 | archive-date=2018-08-19 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180819214231/http://archive.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2163_B.htm | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Lebanon}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gulfnews.com/news/mena/lebanon/lebanon-to-hold-parliamentary-elections-in-may-2018-1.2043638|access-date=23 June 2017|title=Lebanon to hold parliamentary elections in May 2018|date=14 June 2017 |archive-date=18 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180618075837/https://gulfnews.com/news/mena/lebanon/lebanon-to-hold-parliamentary-elections-in-may-2018-1.2043638|url-status=live}}</ref> *{{flag|Sri Lanka}}<ref group=CEPPS name=srilanka/> {{div col end}}
==== Europe ==== {{div col|colwidth=20em}} *{{flag|Albania}}<ref>{{Cite web |year=2020|title=Broshurë Informative mbi proceset zgjedhore Parlamentare dhe Lokale në Shqipëri, mbi partitë politike, legjislacionin, rekomandimet e OSBE/ODIHR (1991-2020) |trans-title=Information Booklet on Parliamentary and Local Electoral Processes in Albania, on Political Parties, Legislation, OSCE / ODIHR Recommendations (1991-2020) |url=http://isp.com.al/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/ISP-%E2%80%93-Broshure-informative-mbi-zgjedhjet-ne-Shqiperi-1991-2020.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210201235940/http://isp.com.al/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/ISP-%E2%80%93-Broshure-informative-mbi-zgjedhjet-ne-Shqiperi-1991-2020.pdf|archive-date=1 February 2021|publisher=Instituti i Studimeve Politike (ISP)|language=sq}}</ref> *{{flag|Armenia}}<ref>{{cite web | url=https://evnreport.com/politics/armenias-new-electoral-code-open-vs-closed-party-lists-and-other-considerations/ | title=Armenia's New Electoral Code: Open vs. Closed Party Lists and Other Considerations | date=12 July 2018 | access-date=August 24, 2022 | archive-date=August 24, 2022 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220824144607/https://evnreport.com/politics/armenias-new-electoral-code-open-vs-closed-party-lists-and-other-considerations/ | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Austria}}<ref name="eupaper"/> *{{flag|Belgium}}<ref name="eupaper"/> *{{flag|Bosnia and Herzegovina}}<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/POIZpw110508.pdf | title=Izborni zakon BiH, članovi 9.5 i 9.8 | access-date=September 2, 2012 | archive-date=March 7, 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210307223904/http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/POIZpw110508.pdf | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Bulgaria}}<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2015)001-e |title=Report on Proportional Electoral Systems: the Allocation of Seats inside the Lists (open/closed lists) |publisher=Venice Commission |date=March 23, 2015 |access-date=January 24, 2023}}</ref> *{{flag|Croatia}}<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.zakon.hr/z/355/Zakon-o-izborima-zastupnika-u-Hrvatski-sabor | title=Zakon o izborima zastupnika u Hrvatski sabor (Act on Election of Representatives to the Croatian Parliament) | language=hr | access-date=April 8, 2018 | archive-date=April 9, 2018 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180409044144/https://www.zakon.hr/z/355/Zakon-o-izborima-zastupnika-u-Hrvatski-sabor | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Cyprus}}<ref name="eupaper"/> *{{flag|Czech Republic}}<ref group=CEPPS name=cze/> *{{flag|Denmark}}<ref name="eupaper"/> *{{flag|Estonia}}<ref group=CEPPS name=est/> *{{flag|Finland}}<ref name="eupaper"/> *{{flag|Germany}} in:{{citation needed|date=March 2024}} ** {{flag|Bavaria}}{{citation needed|date=March 2024}} **{{flag|Bremen}} ** {{flag|Hamburg}} ** Municipal elections in various states *{{flag|Greece}}<ref name="eupaper"/> *{{flag|Iceland}} * {{flag|Italy}} for European, regional and municipal elections. (formerly used for national parliamentary elections)<ref>{{cite journal | url=http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/5626/1/MPRA_paper_5626.pdf | title=Pork-Barrel Politics in Postwar Italy, 1953-94 |author=Miriam A. Golden |author2=Lucio Picci | journal=American Journal of Political Science | date=April 2008 | volume=52 | issue=2 | pages=268–289 | doi=10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00312.x | access-date=2012-08-01 | archive-date=2021-03-01 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210301132951/https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/5626/1/MPRA_paper_5626.pdf | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Latvia}}<ref group=CEPPS name=lat/> *{{flag|Liechtenstein}}<ref name="eupaper"/> *{{flag|Lithuania}}<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/countries/id/125/ | title=IFES Election Guide | Country Profile: Lithuania | access-date=2018-08-19 | archive-date=2018-08-20 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180820005703/http://www.electionguide.org/countries/id/125/ | url-status=live }}</ref> *{{flag|Luxembourg}}<ref group=CEPPS name=luxembourg/> *{{flag|Netherlands}}<ref group=CEPPS name=net/> *{{flag|Poland}} *{{flag|San Marino}}<ref name="eupaper">{{cite web | url=https://ecprd.secure.europarl.europa.eu/ecprd/getfile.do;jsessionid=3b490694614cde33796973863f72c657?id=5063 | title=Electoral Systems in Europe: An Overview | publisher=European Centre for Parliamentary Research and Documentation | location=European Parliament in Brussels | date=October 2000 | access-date=July 6, 2012 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130509064043/https://ecprd.secure.europarl.europa.eu/ecprd/getfile.do;jsessionid=3b490694614cde33796973863f72c657?id=5063 | archive-date=May 9, 2013 }}</ref> *{{flag|Slovakia}}<ref group=CEPPS name=slovak/> *{{flag|Slovenia}}<ref group=CEPPS name=slovenia/> *{{flag|Sweden}}<ref group=CEPPS name=sweden/> *{{flag|Switzerland}}<ref name="mainw"/> *{{flag|Ukraine}}<ref>[https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukrinform-ukrainian-parliament-adopts-electoral-code.html UkrInform: Ukrainian parliament adopts Electoral Code] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308213535/https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukrinform-ukrainian-parliament-adopts-electoral-code.html |date=2021-03-08 }}, Kyiv Post</ref> {{div col end}}
==== Partially recognized states ==== *{{flag|Kosovo}} *{{flag|Northern Cyprus}} *{{flag|Somaliland}}
=== Types === Types of open list systems used in the lower house of the national legislature.<ref>{{Cite web| title=Open List Proportional Representation | url=https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/open-list-proportional-representation.pdf | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024033723/https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/open-list-proportional-representation.pdf | archive-date=2021-10-24}}</ref> {| class="wikitable" !Country !Legislative body ! colspan="2" |System !Variation of open lists !Number of votes (for candidates) !Apportionment method !Electoral threshold !Governmental system !Notes |- |Albania |Parliament (Kuvendi) | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | | |D'Hondt method |4% nationally or 2.5% in a district |Parliamentary republic | |- | rowspan="2" |Armenia | rowspan="2" |National Assembly | rowspan="2" style="background:#0066FF"| | rowspan="2" |Open list party proportional representation | | | rowspan="2" |D'Hondt method | rowspan="2" |5% (parties), 7% (blocs) | rowspan="2" |Parliamentary republic | rowspan="2" |Party lists run-off, but only if necessary to ensure stable majority of 54% if it is not achieved either immediately (one party) or through building a coalition.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Armenia, Parliamentary Elections, 2 April 2017: Needs Assessment Mission Report |url=https://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/armenia/293546 |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=osce.org |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=DocumentView |url=https://www.arlis.am/DocumentView.aspx?DocID=109081 |website=www.arlis.am}}</ref> If a party would win more than 2/3 seats, at least 1/3 seats are distributed to the other parties. |- |<div style="text-align: center;">—</div> | |- |Aruba |Parliament | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 |D'Hondt method | | | |- | rowspan="3" |Austria | rowspan="3" |National Council | rowspan="3" style="background:#0066FF"| | rowspan="3" |Open list party proportional representation |More open: 14% on the district level (among votes for the candidates party) | rowspan="3" |1 in each geographic level of candidate list |Hare quota | rowspan="3" |4% | rowspan="3" |Parliamentary republic | rowspan="3" | |- |More open: 10% on the regional (state) level (among votes for the candidates party) |Hare quota |- |More open: 7% of the on the federal level (among votes for the candidates party) |D'Hondt method |- |Belgium |Chamber of Representatives | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |As many as there are mandates in the district |D'Hondt method |5% (per constitutiency) |Constitutional monarchy | |- |Bosnia and Herzegovina |House of Representatives | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 |Sainte-Laguë method | |Parliamentary directorial republic | |- |Brazil |Chamber of Deputies | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 |Hare Quota, D'Hondt method for remaining seats |No national electoral threshold, for parties threshold is 80% of the Hare Quota in the district; for candidates 20% of the Hare Quota in the district |Presidential republic | |- |Bulgaria |National Assembly | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 |Hare quota |4% |Parliamentary republic | |- |Chile |Chamber of Deputies | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |1 | | | | |- |Croatia | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 | |5% | | |- |Cyprus | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 for every 4 seats in the district | | | | |- |Czech Republic | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-4 | |5% | | |- |Democratic Republic of the Congo | | |Parallel voting | |0-1 to 0-5 depending on number of mandates in the district | | | | |- |Denmark |Folketing (Unicameral legislature) | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list two tier proportional representation with compensating | |0-1 | |2% | | |- |Ecuador |National Congress | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list two tiers proportional representation without compensating |<div style="text-align: center;">—</div> |As many as there are mandates in the district Panachage allowed |Sainte-Laguë method | | | |- |El Salvador |Legislative Assembly | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |As many as there are mandates in the district Panachage allowed |D'Hondt method | | | |- |Estonia | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |1 | |5% | | |- |Fiji | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |1 |D'Hondt method |5% | | |- |Finland | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |1 |D'Hondt method | | | |- |Greece | | |Majority bonus | |0-1 to 0-5 depending on number of mandates in the district |Largest remainder (Hare quota) |3% | |Nationwide closed lists and open lists in multi-member districts. The winning party used to receive a majority bonus of 50 seats (out of 300), but this system will be abolished two elections after 2016.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2016-07-21 |title=Greek MPs approve end to bonus seats, lower voting age |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eurozone-greece-electoral-bill-idUSKCN1011NS |access-date=2019-06-22 |work=Reuters |language=en}}</ref> In 2020 parliament voted to return to the majority bonus two elections thereafter.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Parliament votes to change election law {{!}} Kathimerini |url=http://www.ekathimerini.com/248820/article/ekathimerini/news/parliament-votes-to-change-election-law |access-date=2020-01-25 |website=www.ekathimerini.com |language=en}}</ref> |- |Honduras | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |As many as there are mandates in the district Panachage allowed |Largest remainder (Hare quota) | | | |- |Iceland | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |May change order of candidates on list or cross out rejected candidates |D'Hondt method | | | |- |Indonesia | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 |Sainte-Laguë method |4% | | |- |Kosovo | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-5 |Sainte-Laguë method | | | |- |Latvia | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |May vote for as many candidates or reject as many candidates as there are on the list |Sainte-Laguë method |5% | | |- |Lebanon | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-1 |D'Hondt method | | | |- |Liechtenstein | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |As many as there are mandates in the district | |8% | | |- |Lithuania | | |Parallel voting | |0-5 |Largest remainder (Hare quota) |5% (parties), 7% (coalitions) | | |- |Luxembourg |Chamber of Deputies | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation |Panachage (number of votes equal to the number of members elected) |May vote for or delete as many candidates as there are mandates in the district Panachage allowed |D'Hondt method |No ''de jure'' threshold |Parliamentary system | |- |Netherlands |House of Representatives | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation |More open (25% of the quota to override the default party-list) |0-1 |D'Hondt method |0.67% (1/150) |Parliamentary system | |- |Panama | | |Parallel voting | |As many as there are mandates in the district |Largest remainder (Hare quota) | | | |- |Peru | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-2 |D'Hondt method |5% | | |- |Poland |Sejm | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |1 |D'Hondt method |5% threshold or more for single parties, 8% or more for coalitions or 0% or more for minorities |Parliamentary republic | |- |San Marino | | |Majority jackpot / Open list party proportional representation | |1 |D'Hondt method |3.5% | |If needed to ensure a stable majority, the two best-placed parties participate in a run-off vote to receive a majority bonus. |- |Slovakia | | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation | |0-4 |Largest remainder (Hare quota) |5% | | |- | rowspan="2" |Slovenia | rowspan="2" | | rowspan="2" style="background:#0066FF" | | rowspan="2" |Open list party proportional representation | rowspan="2" | | |Largest remainder (Droop quota) |4% | | |- |0-1 |D'Hondt method |4% | | |- | rowspan="2" |Sri Lanka | rowspan="2" |Parliament | rowspan="2" style="background:#0066FF" | | rowspan="2" |Open list Two tier proportional representation without compensating |Panachage (up to 3 preference votes)<ref>{{Cite web |date=August 4, 2020 |title=Sri Lanka electors can vote for one party, three preferences in 2020 general elections: polls chief |url=https://economynext.com/sri-lanka-electors-can-vote-for-one-party-three-preferences-in-2020-general-elections-polls-chief-72625 |website=EconomyNext}}</ref> |0-3 |Hare quota with largest party receives bonus seat de facto D'Hondt method |5% (per constituency) | rowspan="2" |Semi-presidential system | rowspan="2" | |- |<div style="text-align: center;">—</div> | | ? |''No threshold'' |- |Suriname |National Assembly | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation |Most open |0-1 |D'Hondt method |''No threshold'' |Assembly-independent republic | |- |Sweden |Riksdag | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list Two tiers proportional representation with compensating |More open (5% of the party vote to override the default party-list)<ref>Swedish Election Authority: [http://www.val.se/pdf/electionsinsweden_webb.pdf Elections in Sweden: The way its done] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090225072954/http://www.val.se/pdf/electionsinsweden_webb.pdf|date=2009-02-25}} (page 16)</ref> |0-1 |Sainte-Laguë method (leveling seats) |4% nationally or 12% in a given constituency |Parliamentary system | |- |Switzerland |National Council (Lower house of national legislature) | style="background:#0066FF" | |Open list party proportional representation |Panachage |May vote for or delete as many candidates as there are mandates in the district Panachage allowed |Hagenbach-Bischoff system |''No threshold'' |Semi-direct democracy under an assembly-independent<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Shugart |first1=Matthew Søberg |date=December 2005 |title=Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive And Mixed Authority Patterns |journal=French Politics |volume=3 |issue=3 |pages=323–351 |doi=10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200087 |s2cid=73642272 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Elgie |first=Robert |date=2016 |title=Government Systems, Party Politics, and Institutional Engineering in the Round |journal=Insight Turkey |volume=18 |issue=4 |pages=79–92 |issn=1302-177X |jstor=26300453}}</ref> directorial republic | |- |}
==Notes== '''CEPPS'''
{{reflist|group=CEPPS|refs=<ref name=sweden>{{cite web|url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=206|title=Country Profile: Sweden|work=ElectionGuide|publisher=Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening|date=2010-08-08|access-date=July 8, 2012|archive-date=2016-03-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160329205825/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=206|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=colombia>{{cite web|url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=48|title=Country Profile: Colombia|date=2012-06-19|access-date=July 8, 2012|archive-date=2016-04-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160402030719/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=48|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=luxembourg>{{cite web|url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=126|title=Country Profile: Luxembourg|date=February 4, 2010|access-date=July 8, 2012|archive-date=March 27, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160327014814/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=126|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=srilanka>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=201 | title=Country Profile: Sri Lanka | date=2010-02-18 | access-date=June 30, 2012 | archive-date=2016-03-26 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160326092317/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=201 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=slovenia>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=195 | title=Country Profile: Slovenia | date=2012-02-28 | access-date=June 30, 2012 | archive-date=2016-03-29 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160329014935/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=195 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=net>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=152 | title=Country Profile: Netherlands | date=2010-10-14 | access-date=June 30, 2012 | archive-date=2016-04-02 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160402092500/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=152 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=indo>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=102 | title=Country Profile: Indonesia | date=2010-11-26 | access-date=June 30, 2012 | archive-date=2016-03-29 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160329035601/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=102 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=slovak>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=194 | title=Country Profile: Slovakia | date=February 1, 2012 | access-date=June 30, 2012 | archive-date=April 1, 2016 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160401110021/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=194 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=lat>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=119 | title=Country Profile: Latvia | date=August 5, 2011 | access-date=June 30, 2012 | archive-date=April 2, 2016 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160402042242/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=119 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=est>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?ID=69 | title=Country Profile: Estonia | date=2011-04-15 | access-date=June 30, 2012 | archive-date=2016-03-30 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160330174941/http://www.electionguide.org/country.php?id=69 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=cze>{{cite web | url=http://www.electionguide.org/countries/id/58/ | title=Country Profile: Czech Republic | access-date=2017-08-16 | archive-date=2017-08-16 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170816193806/http://www.electionguide.org/countries/id/58/ | url-status=live }}</ref>}}
==References== {{reflist}}
==External links== *[https://web.archive.org/web/20041010123536/http://www.citizensassembly.bc.ca/public/learning_resources/learning_materials/week5 British Columbia Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform] - A debate on the merits of open and closed lists by the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in the Canadian province of British Columbia, 2004. *[https://web.archive.org/web/20131227085045/http://rcum.uni-mb.si/~jure/preferential8_emlist.pdf "Preferential Voting: Definition and Classification"] - Paper presented by Jurij Toplak at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association's 67th Annual National Conference, Chicago, IL, April 2009.
{{voting systems}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Open List}} Category:Party-list proportional representation