Banzhaf Power Index — Definition, Formula & Examples
The Banzhaf Power Index is a number that measures how much real influence a voter has in a weighted voting system. It counts how often that voter can turn a winning group into a losing one by leaving.
Consider a weighted voting game . A coalition is winning if . Player is critical (a swing voter) in a winning coalition if is losing. Let be the number of winning coalitions in which player is critical. The normalized Banzhaf power index of player is . Some texts instead use the non-normalized form .
Key Formula
Where:
- = Normalized Banzhaf power index of player i, a value from 0 to 1
- = Number of winning coalitions in which player i is critical
- = Number of players in the weighted voting game
Worked Example
Problem: Three shareholders A, B, and C hold 4, 3, and 2 votes. A motion passes with at least 6 votes, so the game is . Find each shareholder's Banzhaf power index.
Step 1: Check every coalition with two or more players. A single player can never win, because the largest weight is 4, which is less than 6. {A, B}, {A, C}, and {A, B, C} reach the quota, so they are winning. {B, C} falls short, so it is losing.
Step 2: In each winning coalition, mark a player as critical if removing that player drops the total below 6. In {A, B} and {A, C}, both members are critical. In {A, B, C}, only A is critical: without A the total is 5, while removing B or C still leaves at least 6.
Step 3: Add the critical counts to get the total, then divide each player's count by that total.
Answer: A has power index (60%). B and C each have power index (20%). B and C have equal power even though B holds more votes.
Visualization
Why It Matters
Courts and political scientists have used the Banzhaf index to judge whether weighted voting is fair. Examples include county boards in New York, where it was cited in legal challenges, and analyses of the U.S. Electoral College. It is a standard topic in liberal-arts math courses such as "Excursions in Modern Mathematics" and in introductory social choice theory.
Common Mistakes
Mistake: Assuming power is proportional to vote weight. With 4, 3, and 2 votes out of 9, students predict shares of about 44%, 33%, and 22%.
Correction: Power depends on how often a player is critical, not on raw weight. In the shares are 60%, 20%, and 20%. Always list the winning coalitions and count the critical players.
