A few general considerations are pertinent in a discussion of cost management. First, expense processing and cost management are handled in very different ways in elections that are fully managed by international organizations (i.e., Cambodia in 1993, Kosovo from 2000 to 2002, and Afghanistan in 2004); elections administered by national authorities with substantial financial support from the international community (i.e., Angola in 1992, Guatemala in 2003, and Mozambique from 1994 to 2004); and elections fully handled by national electoral authorities (i.e., well-established democracies). In the first scenario, expense processing is handled directly by the international agency in charge of election finances—the OSCE in the Balkans and UNDP in other regions of the world. Budgeting, procurement and auditing procedures are followed in accordance with the rules of the relevant international organization. In financially sustainable, well-established democracies, expense management is conducted by the relevant department within the electoral administration in accordance with domestic public management regulations, some of which might pertain specifically to election expense management. Finally, in situations where national electoral authorities are only partly subsidized by the international community, management of expenses charged to external funds tends to be totally or partly in the hands of international implementing agencies like UNDP and the International Organization for Migration (IOM), or a regional organization like the OAS.
Another issue concerns the management of political party and campaign finance by public agencies—an important and sensitive issue in both stable and emerging democracies. Significant variations exist among countries in terms of public versus private funding, legal limits on campaign expenses, obligation for disclosure by political parties, and enforcement responsibilities of electoral authorities. Total or partial public financing of political parties is already common in most democracies, and in some countries such financing represents the fastest-growing electoral public expense over the last five years (i.e., Canada). A correct assessment of campaign costs and financing is of utmost relevance for reaching some sound conclusions about whether the playing field is level for all parties and participants. The fact that political finance reporting and control is methodologically complex and politically sensitive should not keep it from the forefront in both election management analysis and democratic quality assessment.
Regarding specific management practices, the following issues deserve attention: procurement procedures, inventory control, cash transactions, cost overruns, budget audit, high-technology investment and cost-effective measures. Each is described in detail below.
