The
cost of elections is a concern to governments and election management bodies
alike, regardless of the country's level of development. A prohibitively high
cost electoral process that the country cannot afford can jeopardize the entire
democratic process.
Traditionally,
to minimize the cost of an election, the results management system, processes
and procedures chosen should make use of the existing infrastructure, such as
transport and communication networks, as much as practicable, and take into
account literacy levels, infrastructure challenges, and the sources for the
recruitment of officials. As of late, EMBs have increasingly learned that
introducing ICT-solutions can expedite results reporting, but depending on
IT-solutions chosen, that could also significantly increase costs.
Sustainability over more than one electoral cycles of such an investment
sometimes has become paramount for the actual decision to upgrade a results
system, as much as transparency, speed and reduced fraud risks in the actual
counting and tabulation processes.
What is
affordable, expensive or feasible can vary greatly between countries. Here are
some generic guidelines regarding costs:
- the simpler the system, the lower the vote counting
costs;
- the greater the use of existing infrastructure, the lower
the cost;
- the more permanence and continuity between elections, the
higher the savings in materials and training costs;
- the lower the political stability, the higher the cost in
terms of added security measures and the more transparent the processes and EMB
must be.
- the higher the risks of fraud and electoral malpractices
are the more efforts the EMB must put in place to effectively deter, detect and
mitigate such vulnerabilities. This can require both additional financial
assets and time.
Alternative technology-focussed questions include:
- Is it difficult to recruit
qualified voting station and/or counting staff?
- Is it difficult to recruit
qualified IT support personnel, particularly in rural and remote areas, where
any electronic solutions will be deployed?
- Have there been problems with
irregular vote counts?
- Is there a culture of trust of
high technology used by the EMB and will the extension of its use to electronic
voting benefit or suffer from this?
- Is there a need to reduce the
number of election workers?
- Will the reduction in election
workers be offset by the increased cost of recruiting and deploying
highly-skilled ICT workers, or the outsourced cost if these functions are
fulfilled by a contractor?
- Is the ballot becoming more
complex?
- Will the voter education
function be able to ensure that voters can cope with and properly use any
technology being considered?
- Is the vote count coming in
too slowly?
- Is the telecommunications
infrastructure adequate?
- Do voters have to wait too
long to cast their ballot?
- Will the throughput in polling
stations be increased by the technology being proposed?
Hidden Costs Frequently Overlooked or Underestimated in
Elections Technology Procurement
- Vendor Lock-in.
- Obsolete technology - absent
the capacity to implement minor updates, entire systems can be abandoned.
- Storage
– New technology (computers or similar machines) may need different storage
condition than manual voting materials (air conditioned, for example). Since manual-voting
materials should also be kept, switching methods may require more storage space
for EMBs.[1]
- Excess use of proprietary
products - rather than standards-based, modular approach. This is a separate
issue from the open source (code) software issue and relates primarily to
hardware.
- Depreciation - more rapid in
harsh environments.
- Inventory wastage due to high rates of theft or pilferage
- Sustainability does not simply
happen - it must be set as a requirement of the procured solution and, like
energy conservation, you will have to spend money to save money - higher
specification, hardware that offers longer duty- and life-cycles.
- Procurement Integrity Costs -
fees paid where donors require procurement by international or other
organisations in order to overcome real or perceived deficiencies with national
procurement mechanisms.
- Contingency - for example, air,
rather than sea freight because of inadequate time available for procurement.
- Inadequate testing is
dangerous. But effective testing will inevitably results in changes to
hardware, software and procedures. These have cost implications and are often
overlooked.
- Third party certification of
software or systems, sometimes necessary to create, sustain or rebuild
stakeholder confidence in high technology is expensive and time-consuming.
Do not reinvent the wheel
While Results Management Systems cannot reasonably be
considered COTS (Commercial-Off-The-Shelf) technologies, by and large, the
hardware and software components of such systems are typically familiar, mature
and cheaply available. Laptop computers, their smaller and more mobile
replacements, software such as operating systems, database management systems,
data capture, services such as mobile data communications - these are all
widely available even in developing countries. However, the expertise required
to integrate these familiar components into effective results management
systems is far from commonplace and comes at a premium cost. Even the expertise
necessary to properly analyse the electoral voting and counting processes of
the EMB and turn this into sufficiently detailed specifications.
Specific Needs for Vote Counting and Aggregation of
Results
The local environment and political situation may add
to specific needs for vote counting at voting stations, or at central
locations.
Such local factors might include the need for
additional security measures during counting, transportation requirements, or
specific communications technology that is not readily available.
Higher than expected turnout may affect the counting
duration, and additional staff may be required to cope with the additional
ballots to be counted. Expected budgets may be exceeded if such contingencies
have not been planned for. Worst (or best) case scenarios (for example,
expecting 100 percent of registered voters to turn out to vote) are frequently
used when election budgets are planned in order to build in sufficient
capacity.
The selection of a specific counting, tabulation and
communication technologies may also increase costs or reduce them, depending on
the choices made. However, if not planned properly and when sustainability and
local ownership are considered, the cost saving argument used to justify an
ICT-upgrade could prove faulty. Before properly tested, the old manual system
often needs to be in place as a fall-back and thereby add additional
transitional costs.
Transmitting results by telephone is often cost-effective,
depending on distance and availability, but could negatively affect the
accuracy given increased error rate. As a result, EMBs are beginning to
introduce various SMS solutions to convey interim results from voting stations.
SMS is a relatively inexpensive communications solution, both in terms of
software development and hardware requirements. Having said that, given its
extremely important functionality – transmitting provisional results –
extensive testing of the system, targeted training of users and a proactive EMB
command and control capability are necessary additional components adding
costs.
Where
conventional fixed telephones or facsimiles are not available, mobile phones or
radios may be used. Results may also be sent by electronic mail where access is
available. Where no electronic options are available, results may have to be
delivered by courier.
Human Resources versus Cost of Technology
Use of
technology for counting votes may reduce the overall cost of an election and be
more effective under certain conditions.
However,
depending on local factors, the process of manually counting paper ballots may
be comparatively less expensive. Whether a technological solution is
cost-effective will depend on a range of local circumstances, including:
- the complexity of the voting system,
- the number of ballots being counted,
- the relative cost of labour compared to technology,
- whether counting is centralized or decentralized.
- the availability and cost of skilled IT professionals for
development and support, and
- the differing recruitment profiles; are suitable persons
available to hire and train to operate the technology?
In general, a mechanical or computerized method of
counting paper ballots (as opposed to systems where votes are cast
electronically or mechanically) may be cost-effective, where large numbers of
ballots are being counted centrally, where a voting system is used that lends
itself to mechanical counting, and where labour costs are relatively high.
Cost considerations aside, election management bodies
should be aware that mechanical or computerized counting methods might be
faster and more accurate than manual methods. However, some systems have proven
insufficient transparency as lacking a paper trail and thereby the actual
results stemming from some voting machines cannot be verified in a recount.
While the use of technology might appear a costly
option, if the technology acquisition costs can be spread over several
elections, the investment may be worthwhile. Experience has shown, however,
that many systems do not deliver the hoped-for lifespan that would make the
original investment worthwhile.
On the other hand, rapid advances in technology tend
to cause electoral technology to age quickly and for technology to become
defunct between one election and the next. Availability of technical support during
the electoral period is another important aspect that should be considered.
A
detailed cost-benefit analysis, accompanied by a study of the legal impacts and
management risks associated with the adoption of a particular technological
solution, may be worthwhile before any final decisions are made to adopt
technological vote counting methods.
[1] Rial, Juan. "Posibilidades y límites del voto electrónico". Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales de Perú. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modEscaparate/caratulas/rial.pdf
