Индексы власти и парадоксы власти в Читинской Областной Думе

  • Published on
    05-Apr-2017

  • View
    217

  • Download
    4

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

<ul><li><p>5 3</p><p>: </p><p>. 50 </p><p>. ,, -</p><p> , , -</p><p>, 1.</p><p>--</p><p>, -. </p><p>, ,.</p><p>. -</p><p>. -</p><p>.. -</p><p>N={1, 2, ..., n -. -</p><p>. . </p><p>. , . . </p><p>- ( , , , ), -</p><p>. . , -</p><p> 3- 4- .</p><p>The article considers the indexes of power application to the analysis of the ruling structures ofdifferent levels (Banzhaf index, PenroseBanzhaf index, DeeganPackel index, Holer index) and theconcept of paradoxes of power. The two approaches to constructing an index of power are used. Thevalues of indexes of power are found; the occurrence of paradoxes of power in the Chita Regional Dumaof 3rd and 4th convocations is investigated.</p><p>. G -G=(N, W), W </p><p>, -:</p><p>1) W ,2) W ,3) S T S W, T W.</p><p>W. , -</p><p>W, L. L -. -</p><p> -, </p><p>.-</p><p>, - ,</p><p>, - -</p><p>. -, </p><p>.S . -</p><p>k S , S</p><p>. , -, -</p></li><li><p>5 4</p><p>2001 20053 9 214 93 4 3</p><p> ( ) 19 35 (23) 5 (7)</p><p>38 40</p><p>-. , </p><p> -, -</p><p> . -, -</p><p>-. ,</p><p>-. , </p><p>-, </p><p>. </p><p>, .-</p><p>, </p><p>. [q; w1, ..., wn],</p><p>q , ,, wk (k=1, ..., n).</p><p>q w1, ..., wn -,</p><p>S , , ,</p><p>q, , . .</p><p> , - (N, W) -</p><p>n , k , k N</p><p>.-</p><p>:</p><p>G=(N, W) -Bz(G)=(Bz1(G),, Bzn(G)), -</p><p>(1)</p><p>k ,k .</p><p> , -</p><p>-, PBz(G)=(PBz1(G),,</p><p>PBzn(G)), </p><p>(2)</p><p>k -, k.</p><p> -G=(N,W) DP(G)=(DPi(G),,</p><p>DPn(G)), </p><p>(3)</p><p>M -, m </p><p>,s S.</p><p>, - </p><p>, H(G)=(H1(G),, Hn(G)) , </p><p>(4)</p><p>mk -, -</p><p>k.</p><p>. 2001 . ( 2001) 2005 . ( -</p><p> 2005) -:</p><p>n</p><p>kkwq</p><p>1</p><p>.0</p><p>Skk qwWS .</p><p>nkGBzNj j</p><p>kk ,...,2,1,</p><p>nkGPBzn</p><p>k</p><p>k</p><p>kk ,...,2,1,2 1</p><p>nksm</p><p>GDPSkMS</p><p>k ,...,2,111</p><p>;</p><p>nkm</p><p>mGHNj j</p><p>kk ,...,2,1</p><p>-</p><p>. , , </p></li><li><p>5 5</p><p>, </p><p>; 5 ( 2001 ., 2005 .). </p><p>-</p><p>, , -</p><p> 23 2001 . 7 2005 .</p><p>:</p><p>0,789473684 0,052631579 0,0526315792001 0,025134408 0,296271227 0,0877494420 1 02005 0 1 00,9375 0,625 0,6252001 0,05706811 0,672688961 0,1992366310 1 02005 0 1 00,5 0,125 0,1252001 0,044956 0,064735 0,038280 1 0 2005 0 1 00,5 0,125 0,1252001 0,04359 0,0533 0,037470 1 02005 0 1 0</p><p>0,052631579 0,0526315792001 0,069212789 0,0692127890 02005 0 00,625 0,6252001 0,157148838 0,1571488380 0 2005 0 00,125 0,1252001 0,042066 0,0420660 0 2005 0 00,125 0,1252001 0,0405 0,04050 02005 0 0</p><p>-, (2001 .) , </p><p> ;-</p><p>, -. </p><p>, </p><p>, --</p><p>, , , -</p><p>. , </p><p>, -</p><p>. (2001 .), . ., </p><p> 23 , 19 1 , -</p></li><li><p>5 6</p><p>. , , ,</p><p>, ,, , -</p><p>, ., -</p><p>, 2005 . , -</p><p>, , .</p><p>.. </p><p>, --</p><p>.G=[q; w1, ..., wn] </p><p>, </p><p> .</p><p>, </p><p>(5)</p><p>. -, -</p><p>, , </p><p>-, .</p><p>G=[q; w1, ..., wn] -, </p><p>. -, </p><p>(6)-</p><p>, </p><p>, . -</p><p>-, </p><p> , -, . -</p><p>, --</p><p>.-</p><p>. , t t. -</p><p>-, </p><p>:</p><p>. , t </p><p>Pt t. </p><p>, :</p><p>(8)</p><p>--</p><p>, , --</p><p>. , -</p><p> , .</p><p>.</p><p>nwwqG ,...,; 1</p><p>n</p><p>k k</p><p>n</p><p>k kww</p><p>11</p><p>GGwwk kkkk,</p><p>11 ,,...,; nn wwwqG</p><p>GGNk kk,</p><p>tw~</p><p>kttktt wwP ~~:1</p><p>kttktt wwP ~~:2</p><p>tw~</p><p>kttkttktt PPwwP ~~:</p><p>1 Rusinowska A., van Deemen A. The redistribution paradox and the Paradox of new members in theGerman parliament. Nova Science Publishers, 2004; . . . : -</p><p>. .: , , 1998; , .. 6- . . .: , 2001.</p><p> 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1</p></li></ul>

Recommended

View more >