Quadratic Voting Plateform

A voting platform to experiment with quadratic (non-binary) voting, enabling participants to express the intensity of their preference by distributing their "vote credit" among a set of proposals.

Photography of the interface in use on a laptop during an experiment. Open image

Stéphanie Hémon

You want to test the plateform ?

The first (beta) version of the platform is now online, allowing you to test how it works.

About the quadratic voting plateform

A non-binary voting system for the common good

In our democracies, the quest for the common good is central to consultation and voting systems. However, traditional voting remains binary, limited to a yes or no vote. Faced with today's global challenges, it is crucial to integrate the diversity of viewpoints to consolidate the common good. The challenge lies in aggregating preferences while taking into account their intensity. Indeed, a binary vote does not reflect the intensity of a yes or a no (a firm yes or a default yes, for example). What's more, decisions are made in a sequential and eliminatory manner, preventing the ranking of candidates or projects so as to consider, from the first round onwards, everyone's second choices.
Through its Chair in Decision Design, the Transition Design Lab is exploring the theme of decision-making in collaborative and participatory design approaches for transitions, and has designed and developed a digital platform for testing another voting format: quadratic voting.
Invented by Glen Weyl[1], an economist at Microsoft Research, the quadratic voting method enables everyone to assign a specific weight to a series of proposals. As a political tool, quadratic voting can also be beneficial to companies, overcoming divisions between business units and fostering cooperation, particularly on cross-functional infrastructures.

Allocate "vote credits" to express the intensity of your preference

The special feature of quadratic voting is the increasing cost of votes. The first vote for a candidate costs one credit. But voting twice for the same candidate costs four credits (i.e. two squared); giving three votes costs nine credits (three squared), and so on.

Quadratic voting is based on the principle of scarcity: voters are limited by their credits, forcing them to compromise between proposals[2]. This distinction is crucial because, as Mullainathan and Shafir[3] point out in their book on scarcity:


"When we experience scarcity of any kind, we are absorbed by it. The mind automatically and powerfully focuses on unmet needs... It changes the way we think. It imposes itself on our mind." (p.7)[2]


With quadratic voting, participants have limited resources and choose accordingly.

References

[1]Weyl (2013), [2]Quarfoot et al. (2017), [3]Mullainathan & Shafir (2013)

Experiments

On the occasion of the 2024 days of the research program "Agroecology and Digital: data, agri-equipment and genetic resources at the service of the agroecological transition and adaptation to climatic hazards", co-piloted by INRAE and Inria, the research team of the LINDDA pilot project launched in 2023, Annie Gentes director of CY école de design and Muriel Mambrini-Doudet director of the Learning Planet Institute doctoral school, organized a quadratic voting experiment. The aim was to implement this tool for democratic voting, to guide future choices in support of research projects. This voting experiment focused on research proposals in favor of responsible digital technology for the agro-ecological transition. 50 people present at the event took part in the experiment, dividing their "vote credit" between the 10 proposals submitted to their vote, and 12 people took part in the focus group workshop organized to discuss the uses of quadratic voting and the interface. The results of the experiment are currently being analyzed.

Open image Plateform in use on a smartphone during the first experimentation.

Stéphanie Hémon

Team

The design and development of the plateform is a result of a collaboration of researchers, designers and a developer.

Annie Gentes

Annie Gentes is professor of Information and communication sciences and design. She is the director of research of CY School of Design, CY University.

Justine Peneau

Justine Peneau is a post-doctoral researcher at the Transition design lab of CY Design School.

Anthony Ferretti

Independent interface designer - Co-founder of Praticable & Collectif Bam

Files

More about the quadratic voting and our experimentation

Interested ?

Would you like to use the platform for a project? Have a question?