‘Electoral reform’ is a broad term that covers, among other things, improving the responsiveness of electoral processes to public desires and expectations. However, not all electoral change is electoral reform. Electoral change can only be referred to as reform if its primary goal is to improve electoral processes, for example through fostering enhanced impartiality, inclusiveness, transparency, integrity, or accuracy. Random and/or frequent electoral change, while it may be reformist, can also be confusing to voters, and thus defeat its purpose. Frequent change may also negatively affect the sustainability of an EMB’s operations.

Electoral reform often only catches the public eye when it involves changes to representational arrangements, such as electoral systems, but it is a much broader concept than this. There are three distinct areas of electoral reform, in each of which an EMB and its stakeholders may play different roles:

1. legal — involving the amendment of the constitution, the electoral law, or related regulations and rules to enhance the integrity, relevance, and adequacy of the legal framework within which the EMB delivers its services. This may include institutional reform of the EMB itself;
2. administrative — the introduction within the EMB of new strategies, structures, policies, procedures, and technical innovations that enable it to implement its legal responsibilities and deliver its services more efficiently, effectively, and sustainably. These could include: policies and practices on issues such as procurement, financial integrity, or employment (such as gender balance in the recruitment of EMB staff); making informed voting accessible to groups such as women, remote residents, and the physically impaired; or introducing new technology for services such as voting, voter registration, or electoral logistics; or
3. political – changes which take place in the political environment within which the EMB operates, such as giving it more autonomy or creating a more effective and transparent framework for its funding and accountability.

 

Change may be brought about by different means and originate from different sources. Many electoral reforms have been introduced by governments or by EMBs, sometimes triggered by voter apathy, as in the case of the UK, or as the result of internal investigations. The prevailing international environment, which emphasizes democratic representation, aided and abetted by local civil society bodies and other stakeholders, has emboldened many EMBs to press their governments for electoral reform.