Virtual Conference - July 3-7, 2023


Organizers

Co-Convenors: Holly Ann Garnett (RMC, Canada); Toby S. James (UEA, UK); Masaaki Higashijima (Tohoku University, Japan)

Conference Administrators: Madison MacGregor (EIP, Project Coordinator); Sofia Caal-Lam (EIP, Project Assistant)

Co-Sponsors

The Carter Center, IFES, and International IDEA

*This is a free conference

Theme

Elections are an indispensable part of the democratic process (Przeworski 1999; Dahl 1971). Through them, citizens can elect their representatives, hold governments to account and shape policy making.  Yet it is well known there is enormous variation in the quality and inclusiveness of elections around the world (Norris 2014, 2015; Birch 2011; James and Garnett 2020; Norris 2017).  An electoral cycle approach shows that problems can vary from cases of electoral violence and voter intimidation, vote rigging, gerrymandered electoral districts, incomplete electoral registers, through to under-resourced electoral officials and poorly designed adjudication processes and more. Even further, elections can play a role in democratic resilience (or backsliding) more generally.

This conference therefore opens a forum to explore questions around elections globally. What role do elections play in democratic backsliding? What new challenges are elections facing?  How have new technologies changed the game for elections and democracy? How will the practical challenges of organising an election during a pandemic influence elections to come?

To contribute towards the global debate, papers are welcome address or identify threats to electoral integrity; but also, innovations and mechanisms for defending the democratic process.

The conference comes as the 2023 Global Electoral Integrity Report is launched.

Programme

Monday, July 3rd

14:00 (GMT)

Introduction

Chaired by Toby S. James (University of East Anglia) & Holly Ann Garnett (Royal Military College of Canada / Queen’s University)

The Global Electoral Integrity Report

PANEL 1: Electoral Research for Policy ImpacT, convened by ACE

  • How can we coordinate electoral research efforts and existing databases to maximize their policy impact? This question is vital in light of the growing complexity of and interest in electoral management.

    The ACE Electoral Knowledge Network has a strong record of innovation over the last 25 years and remains an outstanding resource for scholars and practitioners in the field. This panel will assess what is next for ACE, in terms of addressing data gaps in the field, expanding its role as a knowledge hub, or encouraging a learning agenda amongst EMBs.

    Speakers will consider what ACE usage tells us about practitioner needs and specific next steps for maximizing the value of electoral research for this audience. Additionally, we see possibilities for improved and mutually beneficial linkages with academia, particularly for addressing gaps between the knowledge that practitioners want and the latest advances in academic research on those issues.

    We will stress future-oriented ideas, such as a regular survey of EMBs that would streamline the collection and publication of data and ideally eliminate the need for EMBs to respond to duplicate requests for information. A guiding objective is making the relationship between researchers, organizations, etc. on the one hand, and EMBs on the other, as genuinely symbiotic as possible. We believe that electoral research and databases are important for working toward that objective and envision this discussion will energise discussions and work in this area.

Chaired by Cassandra Emmons (IFES)

  • What ACE usage tells us that practitioners need – Obehi Okojie (The Carter Center) and Michal Khan (Elections Canada)

  • Encouraging a learning agenda for EMBs – Hannah Roberts (IFES, Consultant)

  • Towards a research rhythm – Abdurashid Solijonov (IDEA) and Sonali Campion (University of East Anglia)

19:00 (GMT)

PANEL 2: New Challenges for Electoral Officials

Chaired by David C. Kimball (University of Missouri-St. Louis)

Discussant: Joseph Coll (Sewanee: The University of the South)

  • Better poll workers, better performance? The case of poll worker recruitment, training and team composition in Germany – Daniel Hellmann (Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg)

  • Incivility, Slurs, Threats, and Violence Against Elected Officials: How Does the Public Respond? – Laurel Harbridge-Yong (Northwestern University), Alexandra Filindra (University of Illinois) and Rebecca Littman (University of Illinois)

  • The ambiguity of international electoral aid for electoral resilience of CSOs during processes of democratic backsliding – Rebecca Wagner (Peace Research Institute)

  • Evaluating the Partisan Effects of Pandemic Mitigation with Polling Place Data from the Republic of Georgia – Ani Tepnadze (West Virginia University) and Erik S. Herron (West Virginia University)

  • Election officials as trusted messengers: Assessing the effects of trust-building social media campaigns on voters’ trust in election officials during the 2022 midterm election – Thessalia Merivaki (Mississippi State University), Mara Suttmann-Lea (Connecticut College), Rachel Orey (Bipartisan Policy Center)

Tuesday, July 4th

9:00 (GMT)

PANEL 3: Voter ID in Britain: Lessons from the May polls

  • In recent years, elections and fundamental democratic rights have become politicized in many democracies. Current debates about introducing or tightening mandatory voter ID are central to this trend and affect over a billion voters worldwide (e.g., the UK, where voter ID is being introduced in 2023; Australia, where the government first proposed and then withdrew a voter ID reform in 2021; India, which legislated in 2021 to link voter identification to the biometric Aadhaar ID system; and the US, where, as of 2023, 36 states had enacted some form of voter ID requirement). Mandatory voter ID makes the democratic right to vote conditional on the presentation of a permissible form of ID. This paper examines how voter attitudes and behaviour are impacted when mandatory voter ID is introduced in a democracy where a significant number of voters lack the requisite identification. We address this question by making use of a unique opportunity to study – in real time – a reform in the UK that introduces voter ID in the 2023 English local elections. Using a difference-in-differences design, we employ a set of four original surveys, conducted pre- and post-election in local authorities with elections 2022 and 2023, to understand the effect of mandatory ID on voter attitudes and behaviour (e.g., turnout, perceived electoral fairness, integrity, and access).

Chaired by Holly Ann Garnett (Royal Military College, Canada)

  • The 2023 Local Elections in Britain – Sandy Grant and Phil Thompson (Electoral Commission)

  • The effects of Voter ID on electoral participation and integrity: lessons from Britain – Alistair Clark (Newcastle University) and Toby S. James (University of East Anglia)

  • The effects of mandatory Voter ID on voter attitudes and behaviour – Petra Schleiter (University of Oxford), Jonathan Homola (Rice), Margit Tavits (Washington University)

  • The Democracy Volunteer's Assessment of the May Local Elections – John Ault (Democracy Volunteers)

  • The 2023 Local Elections: the view from practitioners – Peter Stanyon (Association of Electoral Administrators)

14:00 (GMT) 

PANEL 4: Electoral Finance & Accountability

Chaired by Alistair Clark (Newcastle University)

Discussant: Sebastian Dettman (Singapore Management University)

  • Understanding the modern election campaign: Analysing campaign eras through financial transparency disclosures at the 2019 UK general election – Sam Power (University of Sussex), Katharine Dommett (University of Sheffield) and Andrew Barclay (University of Sheffield)

  • Shrouded in Secrecy: The Electoral Bonds Scheme and Its Implications for Democratic Accountability in India – Deshdeep Dhankhar (Centre de Sciences Humaines)

19:00 (GMT)

PANEL 5: Building and Breaking Voter Confidence

Chair: Narda Carranza (Pontifical Catholic University of Peru)

Discussant: Joseph Klaver (University of Passau)

  • The Role of Electoral Integrity and Winning-Losing in Magnifying Mass Affective Polarization: Evidence from Consolidated and Unconsolidated Democracies – Hatice Mete-Dokucu (Bilkent University)

  • Could parity be a predictor of countries with a high perception of electoral integrity? A cross-national proposal to study – Claudia Mayordomo (University of Murcia)

  • Are political trust orientations predictive of how citizens will interpret online political advertising transparency disclosures? – HazelGordon (University of Sheffield), Tom Stafford (University of Sheffield), and Katharine Dommett (University of Sheffield)

  • Combatting Misinformation in the Political Sphere: Lessons Learned from the 2022 Brazilian Elections – Rodrigo Stumpf (UFRGS) and Ana Julia Bonzanini Bernardi (FESPSP)

Wednesday, July 5th

9:00 (GMT)

PANEL 6: Electoral Manipulation: New Strategies and Threats

Chaired by Rebecca Wagner

Discussants: Masaaki Higashijima (Tohoku University, Japan) and Elvin Ong (National University of Singapore)

  • Do Elections enable Voters to remove non-performing leaders? Quality and Legitimacy of Election in Sub-Saharan Africa – David Olusanjo (Florida International University)

  • Malawi's 'Tipp-Ex' Election and its Aftermath – Arne Tostensen (Chr. Michelsen Institute)

  • Trump’s Manipulation of the 2020 Elections: A New Framework for Analyzing Electoral Manipulation Tactics – Maria Lindén (Finnish Institute of International Affairs)

  • Mimicking Election Monitoring: A Challenge to the Liberal International Order by Contesting Democracy Promotion? – Markus Pollak (University of Vienna / Central European University (CEU))

  • Party Development and Election Violence: Evidence from Nineteenth Century England and Wales – Patrick Kuhn (Durham University), Luke Blaxhill (Oxford University), Gidon Cohen (Durham University), Gary Hutchison (Edinburgh University) and Nick Vivyan (Durham University)

12:00 (GMT)

PANEL 7 - ROUNDTABLE: COURT Litigation over Technology in Elections

  • For decades, many have hoped that technology would revolutionize how elections are conducted. Replacing traditional paper-based approaches could offer a dramatic improvement in voter identification, faster and easier voting and results, higher accuracy, heightened integrity and public trust, and lower cost.

    However, electoral technologies have proven vulnerable to failure and security breaches, distrust by contestants and voters, inflated costs, and legal challenges. Misperception and suspicion of electoral technology have often proven as damaging as its actual weaknesses — a fact well exploited by losing candidates, particularly in closely contested, high-stakes elections. Different types of election technology can fail for a myriad of reasons, including procurement problems, institutional capacity constraints, lack of network coverage, or other factors outside the direct control of the election management body (EMB).  As noted above, technology can also be deployed effectively, but nonetheless become a vector for disinformation. Given that elections are increasingly litigated (e.g., Malawi, Kenya, Nigeria), judges need to be prepared to deliberate on a range of issues involving technology, including procurement, piloting, testing, deployment, auditability, and security.

    Transparency in each of these phases is a necessary condition for audibility. If allegations around election technology are brought to the courts, the judiciary may need to adapt rules of procedure to allow for the consideration of digital evidence and the involvement of ICT as experts during proceedings or as friends of the court (amicus curiae). The task of judges in these cases will also be made easier if they have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the technology and its intended use by the EMB before the election begins.

    This panel will explore how electoral technology should be handled with respect to electoral justice. Panelists (justices and senior election/legal experts) will discuss common challenges in litigating disputes related to election technology, in particular from the recent Kenya (2022 General Elections), U.S., Brazil (2022) and Nigeria elections (2023 February), present lessons learned from recent cases, and emerging best practices and challenges.

Chad Vickery, IFES Vice President of Global Strategy and Technical Leadership (Moderator)

  • Justice Yargata Nimpar (Nigeria Court of Appeal)

  • Judge Tunheim (U.S. District Court of Minnesota)

  • Justice Daniel Musinga (Kenya Court of Appeal and Vice President of Judicial Council on Elections)

  • Ronan McDermott (Global Sr. election expert)

  • Typhaine Roblot (IFES Sr. Legal and Justice Advisor)

14:00 (GMT)

PANEL 8: Electoral Management Bodies

Chaired by Sonali Campion (University of East Anglia)

Discussant: Leontine Loeber (University of East Anglia)

  • The 2022 Philippine Elections: Election administration and accountability – Cleo Anne Calimbahin (De La Sallel University-Manila)

  • Lessons Learned Processes: Guidelines from and for Electoral Management Bodies – Catherine Murphy (IFES), and Hannah Roberts (IFES, Consultant)

  • Practical Guidelines for Strengthening EMB and Political Party Relationships Through Improved Communications and Coordination – Bailey Dinman (IFES) and Xeneb Shah (IFES)

  • Election Integrity in Argentina: Transparency Deficits of Subnational Election Management Bodies – Eduardo Repilloza-Fernandez (Transparencia Electoral)

  • Heads and Tails of a Single Coin? Examining Electoral System Requirements for Electoral Administration – Ivan Jarabinský (Institute H21) and Miroslav Líbal (Institute H21)

Thursday, July 6th

12:00 (GMT)

PANEL 9 - ROUNDTABLE: Election Observation in the ‘West’? – Challenges, Lessons Learned, and the Way Forward, convened by the Carter Center and election-watch.eu

  • Election observation efforts can play a key role in assessing election administration and integrity, identifying gaps, and making recommendations for improving elections and the implementation of international standards and regional commitments. Although election observation has typically been conducted in countries in the global South, often by organizations based in the European Union or the United States, international and non-partisan citizen observation is increasingly ‘coming home’ to countries in the ‘West’ and taking place in complex political contexts in the EU and the US.

    In this roundtable discussion, we look at recent election observation efforts around the EU Parliament and US general elections. The panelists will assess key trends, challenges, and lessons learned ahead of the next EU & US elections in 2024, including following questions. The following questions will guide the panelists’ contributions:

    - What is the relevance of election observation in the EU and the US?

    - What are the existing legal frameworks for election observation, and to what degree do relevant laws and policies facilitate or impede nonpartisan citizen observation?

    - What are the similarities and differences regarding the conditions relevant to international vs nonpartisan citizen election observation?

    - What are specific areas that deserve particular attention in observation efforts?

    - What are upcoming challenges and opportunities for election observation ‘at home’?

The roundtable will be moderated by Michael Lidauer (Election-Watch.EU) and Avery Davis-Roberts (The Carter Center)

  • David Carroll (Director, The Carter Center)

  • Armin Rabitsch (Chairperson, Election-Watch.EU)

  • Urszula Gacek (Head of the OSCE/ODIHR EOM to the USA 2020)

  • Brenda Santamaria (Head of Electoral Observation Section, OAS)

  • Olufunto Akinduro (Senior Programme Officer Elections, International IDEA)

14:00 (GMT)

PANEL 10: Technology and Elections: Threats and Opportunities

Chaired by Toby James (University of East Anglia)

Discussant: Nic Cheeseman (University of Birmingham)

  • Demystifying Electoral Cybersecurity – Tarun Chaudhary (IFES)

  • Chain of Harm Applied Research Approach: Strengthening Information Integrity Programming – Brittany Hamzy (IFES)

  • Role of Technology in improving the integrity of the electoral process in Kenya – Wafula Chebukati

19:00 (GMT)

PANEL 11 - Advancing Model Commitments to Electoral Integrity, convened by The Carter Center and IDEA

  • Genuine elections are the keystone in the arch of democratic government. They are related to other essential building blocks, while democracy cannot be realized and maintained without them. They are an expression of democratic tenets that sovereignty resides in the people, and the authority of government is derived from the free exercise of their will through universal and equal suffrage free of unreasonable restrictions.

    As a means for pursuing peace, stability, and prosperity, genuine elections also become a subject of international importance and cooperation. United Nations bodies, treaty enforcement mechanisms and informal governmental associations like the Summit for Democracy and the Open Government Partnership all take up issues concerning the integrity of elections. Additionally, genuine elections are the concern of associations of election management bodies (EMBs) and networks of international and citizen election observers. International interest and the need for international cooperation have intensified as technologies, information environments, actions by transnational anti-democratic actors, and other key factors present heightened challenges to conducting credible elections.

    Several international organizations have cooperated in providing to countries and electoral integrity advocates a set of model commitments, based on international obligations and recognized good practices, to better ensure the integrity of their elections and to work with other countries, agencies, and international and national actors to promote electoral integrity. The model commitments are suggested as starting points, rather than as a comprehensive list or definitive statements in the rapidly evolving electoral universe. They provide minimum commitments concerning principal areas of electoral integrity and suggest ways of deepening such commitments. They also therefore serve as benchmarks for measuring both words (commitments) and deeds (practices) around electoral integrity.

    This panel will survey the electoral commitments made at the first two Summits for Democracy, present the ‘ideal-type’ model commitments, and describe how the global democratic community is mobilizing to safeguard and upgrade global norms to protect the integrity of electoral processes.

Chaired by Avery Davis-Roberts (The Carter Center)

  • The Summits for Democracy and Electoral Commitments – Julia Keutgen (IDEA)

  • Towards Model Commitments – David Carroll (The Carter Center), Marcella Morris (Emory University), and Pat Merloe (NDI, IDEA)

  • Global Norms Building – Ambar Zobairi (USAID) and Clara Cole (IFES)

Friday, July 7th

9:00 (GMT)

PANEL 12: Lessons from Pandemic

Chaired by Kangwook Han (Jeonbuk National University)

Discussants: Susumu Annaka (Hirosaki University) and Kangwook Han (Jeonbuk National University)

  • Elections during Emergencies and Crises: Lessons for Electoral Integrity from the Covid-19 Pandemic' – Toby S. James (UEA), Alistair Clark (Newcastle University) and Erik Asplund (IDEA)

  • Contentious Biometric Voters Registration and Party Politics under COVID-19: The Myth of Social Distance in an African State? – Christopher Appiah-Thompson (The University of Newcastle, Australia)

  • Holding Elections during Future Pandemics and other Emergencies: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic – Robert MacDonald (University of Edinburgh) and Thomas Molony (University of Edinburgh)

  • Electoral integrity resilience, natural disasters and covid-19: Explaining variations in the effect of the pandemic on electoral integrity – Toby S. James (University of East Anglia), and Holly Ann Garnett (RMC/Queen’s)

14:00 (GMT)

PANEL 13: Electoral Laws & Institutions

Chair: Laurel Harbridge-Yong (Northwestern University)

Discussant: Sam Power (Sussex University)

  • Creating a New Measure of Gerrymandering: Its Impact on Election Integrity – Bernard Tamas (Valdosta State University)

  • The Efficacy of Constitutional Mechanisms to Safeguard Electoral Integrity in Mexico – Felipe Carlos Betancourt-Higareda (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México)

  • Money-election-integrity. Are regulations enough for political finance transparency in Visegrad countries? –Anna Frydrych-Depka (Nicolaus Copernicus University) and Karolina Rokicka-Murszewska (Nicolaus Copernicus University)

  • Direct Democracy and Referendums in Switzerland 1850 to 2022 – Madeleine Hosli (Leiden University), Luiza Martins Santos (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais), and Henry Boeree (Leiden University)

  • Electoral Court and By-Elections in France: Guarantor of Electoral Integrity or Political Sideshow? – Joseph Klaver (University of Passau)

  • Countering Bad Faith Actors Who Exploit Election Administration Mistakes – David Levine and Krystyna Sikora (The Alliance for Securing Democracy at the German Marshall Fund)

19:00 (GMT)

PANEL 14: Voter Participation

Chaired by Holly Ann Garnett (Royal Military College / Queen’s University)

Discussant: Mackenzie Lockhart (UC San Diego)

  • Electoral Reform in Bangladesh 2007-2009: Lessons for post-S4D Agenda – Owen Lippert (Opposition International) and Nazmul Kalimullah

  • Guaranteeing the voting rights of trans people in a highly exclusionary context: The case of Peru – Narda Carranza (UARM (University) / ONPE (EMB))

  • Decriminalization process and election integrity: case of Albania – Afrim Krasniqi (Academy of Albanian Studies) and Dorina Bërdufi (UAMD)

  • An IDEA Practitioner Presentation of the Handbook on Special Voting Arrangements (Oliver Joseph, IDEA)

  • Reducing residual votes in Paraguay: Technological innovation in a semi-competitive democracy – Miguel Fernández (Universidad del Desarrollo)

  • Civil society and elections: building trust and increasing electoral integrity? The case of the 2022 elections in Brazil – Carla Luís (CES, Coimbra University)

Bibliography

Birch, Sarah. 2011. Electoral Malpractice (Oxford University Press: Oxford).

Dahl, Robert. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition (Yale University Press: New Haven).

James, Toby S., and Holly Ann Garnett. 2020. 'Introduction: the case for inclusive voting practices', Policy Studies, 41: 113-30.

Norris, Pippa. 2014. Why Electoral Integrity Matters (Cambridge University Press: New York).

———. 2015. Why Elections Fail (Cambridge University Press: New York).

———. 2017. Strengthening Electoral Integrity: The Pragmatic Case for Electoral Assistance (Cambridge University Press: New York).

Przeworski, Adam. 1999. 'Minimalist Conception of Democracy: A Defence.' in Ian Shapiro and Casiano Hacker-Cordon (ed.), Democracy's Value (Cambridge University Press.  [Reprinted in Robert A. Dahl et al (eds) The Democracy Sourcebook]: Cambridge).