Some F&V readers might find interesting a thread from earlier this year at a blog called Unlock Democracy, in which there is a review of Thomas Lundberg’s book, Proportional Representation And The Constituency Role in Britain (Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).
There is also a response from Lundberg himself, where he describes what he set out to investigate in the book:
What I tried to do in this book was to question this notion of inferiority [of list MPs compared to those who win SSD races] – that list-elected members of these bodies are â€™second-classâ€™ representatives – by testing the hypothesis that how someone is elected affects how they behave, a rudimentary rational choice approach. I find, for the most part (based on surveys and interviews) that yes, if you are elected in a single-member constituency, you are somewhat more focused on traditional constituency service, while list-elected representatives tend to focus less on the more mundane service tasks, although some will work hard in constituencies they are targeting (shadowing) for re-election via the single-member constituency route. This can ultimately benefit constituents, who not only have more choice when it comes to representation (8 representatives in Scotland and 5 in Wales), but can gain from the competition generated by MMP.