Different Process, Same Outcome? The Problems of Within‐Party Sortition

Philip Cowley et al.

Political Quarterly2026https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.70057article
AJG 2
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

A recent article in Political Quarterly argues for a ‘sortition of candidature’. We show that because political parties are not themselves socially representative, such a scheme would not result in a socially representative Parliament. Drawing on data from the Party Members Project, we show that while some demographic groups would be better represented than at present under within‐party sortition, in other ways, things would become less representative. This conclusion holds under a range of possible election outcomes. For this type of sortition to generate a descriptively representative House of Commons, we would need to see a significant influx of new party members from currently under‐represented groups. This seems to be very unlikely, based on what we know about the public's appetite for political engagement. We conclude that while this proposal might not make things much worse, it is unlikely to make them much better.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.70057

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{philip2026,
  title        = {{Different Process, Same Outcome? The Problems of Within‐Party Sortition}},
  author       = {Philip Cowley et al.},
  journal      = {Political Quarterly},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.70057},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Different Process, Same Outcome? The Problems of Within‐Party Sortition

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.