The Aggregated Ballot STV system has candidates standing in their own constituencies. Those candidates are then "aggregated" on ballot papers where they are standing.

Parties and candidates would draw their own constituencies, and they would be described on ballot papers so that voters would be infoed how localised the representation they might gain from the candidate would be. With candidates from smaller constituencies listed at the top of balot papers; offering more localised representation, parties and independents would be incentivised to make constituencies as small as they consider to be electorally viable. 

Voting is as with STV, but votes are counted across the electoral area, so any party standing candidates across it can win an accurately proportional seat share.

Standing candidates in larger constituencies in the hope of increasing their chances of election would mean those parties would need to stand more candidates across those areas to win as many seats as they might. Therefore, the same dynamic that limits the number of candidates parties stand under STV to avoid 'splitting the vote' would also keep constituencies small and deter parties drawing 'safe constituencies'.

Parties must stand one new candidate per incumbent on any ballot paper to ensure voters aligned to a party, but not liking their local incumbent, can hold them accountable.