The following section suggests a small handful of the many questions for further discussion.
How can voters and their candidates for elected office be better served by measuring electoral quality?
Even if an assessment of election quality appears to be “correct” or enjoys consensus among a segment of election stakeholders are there ways to better include voter perceptions of the quality of an election? Services such as Ushaidi show some promise to harness open source software and provide the expertise to moderate and filter large data flows (e.g. public comments on quality of an election or reports of alleged post-election violence). Some EMBs have expanded their public outreach through social media such as Facebook and Twitter and they can now offer relatively low cost platforms for individuals to register their comments (e.g. Facebook accounts for EMBs in South Africa or India). These types of platforms need to be tested in more country circumstances.
Observation of all types, including technical or study missions, should continue to publicize their methodologies and especially take care to define not only how they assess but also to be clear about the scope of what they can and cannot measure.
Political parties and candidates present their own challenges since they tend to be primarily interested in what happens during polling and counting and therefore have a direct interest in real time reports of large scale rigging or other irregularities. While party agents may be trained and present at polling stations, candidates and parties in many countries are unable to make fully effective use of their presence in a systematic manner (e.g. compile reports to confirm a victory or dispute a part of the electoral process). Parties and candidates face the challenge of collecting and making sense of a large amount of data in a short time period and compiling it into a legally compelling case should they choose to submit an election petition.
How can we improve the development of a community of practice in election assessment?
Just as the flow of data and findings about the quality of elections has grown, so have the number and type of actors involved in the conduct and assessment of elections. The proliferation of tools and methodologies makes election assessment an ever-evolving field.
As noted above, development of declarations of principles from observers is a useful step to clarify their methodology and establish the grounds for a community of practice. This process needs to continue and reach more EMBs and political parties and other key electoral actors with whom EOMs interact. From their side, EMBs should plan for and manage observer access to the full electoral process noting that it can be to the EMB’s benefit to have observers.
Scholars and practitioners have demonstrated interest throughout the world in learning more about the conduct and assessment of elections. Many online resources are available such as the ACE Practitioners Network, an online network of more than 1,000 election professionals and experts where expertise, experience and information may be shared.
There is also a growing number of training opportunities for election management and election observation, including:
Associations of EMBs and election officials exist on a global, regional and national scale, and offer a range of services such as conferences and workshops, election observation, skills exchanges, and assistance, including:
- Global Electoral Organization Conference (GEO Conference)
- Association of World Electoral Management Bodies (A-WEB)
- Association of European Election Officials (ACEEEO)
- Association of Electoral Administrators (AEA)
- Association of Asian Election Authorities (AAEA)
- Southern Africa Development Community Electoral Commissions Forum (SADC ECF)
Many other formal and informal associations, training course and other forms of information exchange and support are available through social media such as Facebook and LinkedIn.
What is the impact of efforts to measure the quality of elections?
While election observers offer rapid preliminary findings in the days after an election, followed by a more complete public final report, they are not responsible for the implementation of their recommendations. Measures of electoral quality may shape perceptions of election quality but their ability to effective follow-up is limited. In the case of some inter-governmental organizations there may be debate and even repercussions at a regional level (e.g. in an extreme case a country holding irregular elections could see its membership suspended) but successful follow-up may require domestic election reform and international assistance. Even when an opposition party gains power, their pre-election complaints about the electoral law may not be followed up with electoral reform.
