Beyond the Checklist: Addressing New Challenges in Election Observation Methodology

ABSTRACT

In this article, three contemporary challenges – the political environment, the professional election administrative competency, and the legitimacy of electoral institutions – are explored and linked to the election day observation experience, to stimulate discussion and thinking on its implications for election observation. This article explores the complex trust and political dynamics that form the local context of an election and suggests one way forward – to better incorporate qualitative research techniques into election observation methodology.

KEYWORDS:

• Election Observation
• Election Administration
• Electoral Institutions

Notes

1 See the Elections Obligations and Standards Database at <eos.cartercenter.org> for a full list.

2 Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation and a Code of Conduct for International Election Observers (commemorated at the United Nations, New York, 27 October 2005) (DoP).

3 Global Commission on Elections, Democracy & Security, ‘Deepening Democracy: A Strategy for Improving the Integrity of Elections Worldwide’ (Kofi Annan Foundation and International IDEA, 2012).

4 See Pippa Norris, Richard Frank and Ferran Martínez i Coma (eds), Contentious Elections: From Ballots to Barricades (Routledge 2015); Pippa Norris, Richard Frank and Ferran Martínez i Coma (eds), Advancing Electoral Integrity (OUP 2014); R Michael Alvarez, Thad Hall and Susan Hyde, Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation (Brookings Institute Press 2008).

5 Norris and others, Contentious Elections (n 4).

6 Global Commission Report (n 3).

7 Christopher J. Anderson, Andre Blais, Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Ola Listhaug, Loser's Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy (OUP 2005); J Siegle, ‘Developing Democracy’ (2004) 26 Harvard International Review 2, 20–25; Samuel Huntington, ‘Democracy for the Long Haul’ (1996) 7 Journal of Democracy 2, 3–13; Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton University Press 1994); M Brown, S Lynn-Jones and S Miller, Debating the Democratic Peace (MIT Press 1996).

8 Anderson and others (n 7); Graeme Orr, Ritual and Rhythm in Electoral Systems: A Comparative Legal Account (Ashgate 2015); UNDP, Understanding Electoral Violence in Asia (Global Programme for Electoral Cycle Support, New York and Asia-Pacific Regional Centre, Bangkok 2011); Robert Pastor, ‘The Role of Electoral Administration in Democratic Transitions: Implications for Policy and Research’(1999) 6 Democratization 4.

9 Gabrielle Lynch, I Say to You: Ethnic Politics and the Kalenjin in Kenya (University of Chicago Press 2011); European Union Election Observation Mission, ‘Kenya Final Report on General Elections 27 December 2007’ (3 April 2008); Human Rights Watch, ‘Ballots to Bullets: Organized Political Violence and Kenya's Crisis of Governance’ (HRW, 16 March 2008) <www.hrw.org/report/2008/03/16/ballots-bullets/organized-political-violence-and-kenyas-crisis-governance> accessed 31 October 2017.

10 For definition and discussion of international standards and obligations, see Michael Boda (ed), Revisiting Free and Fair Elections (Inter-Parliamentary Union 2004); Michael Boda, ‘A New Generation in Election Observation Standards: International Law as Standard for Electoral Practice’ (PhD dissertation, Johns Hopkins University 2011); Avery Davis-Roberts and David Carroll, ‘Using International Law to Assess Elections’ (2010) 17 Democratization 3; Avery Davis-Roberts and D Carroll, ‘Assessing Elections’ in Pippa Norris, Richard W Frank and Ferran Martinez i Coma (eds), Advancing Electoral Integrity (OUP 2014) 18–33.

11 Examples of such peace agreements include the 1995 Dayton Agreement for Bosnia and Herzegovina and 1992 Rome Accords for Mozambique.

12 Pastor (n 8) 10.

13 IDEA, Electoral Management Design: The International IDEA Handbook (first published 2006, International IDEA 2014).

14 Philip Oltermann, ‘Austrian presidential election result overturned and must be held again’ The Guardian (London, 1 July 2016) accessed 15 January 2017; Valmyndigheten, ‘Omval i Båstad den 10 maj 2015’ [Re-election in Båstad on 10 May 2015] (9 January 2017) <www.val.se/omval_10maj/> accessed 15 January 2017; Karin Thunberg, ‘Omval i Båstad’ [Re-election in Båstad] (Svenska Dagbladet, 17 December 2014) <www.svd.se/omval_i_bastad> accessed 15 January 2017.

15 Steven Brechin, Peter Wilshusen, Crystal Fortwangler and Patrick West, ‘Beyond the Square Wheel: Toward A More Comprehensive Understanding of Biodiversity Conservation As A Social and Political Process’ (2002) 15 Society and Natural Resources 46.

16 Tom Tyler, ‘Psychological Perspectives on Legitimacy and Legitimation’ (2006) 57 Annual Review of Psychology 375; V Braithwaite (ed), Taxing Democracy (Ashgate 2003); Putnam (n 7); David Beetham, The Legitimation of Power (Humanities Press International 1991); Robert Goodin, The Theory of Institutional Design (Cambridge University Press 1996).

17 Piotr Sztompka, Trust: A Sociological Theory (Cambridge University Press 1999); Valerie Braithwaite, ‘Communal and Exchange Trust Norms: Their Value Base and Relevance to Institutional Trust’ in Valerie Braithwaite and Margaret Levi (eds), Trust and Governance (Russell Sage Foundation 1998).

18 Valerie Braithwaite, ‘Compliance with Migration Law’ (Report for the Department of Immigration and Citizenship 2010).

19 Judith Herman, Trauma and Recovery (Basic Books 1992); Cathy Caruth, Unclaimed Experience: Trauma, Narrative, and History (The Johns Hopkins University Press 1996); Abraham Maslow, ‘A Theory of Human Motivation’ (1943) 50 Psychological Review 370.

20 John Braithwaite, Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation (OUP 2002); Roderick Kramer, Organizational Trust: A Reader (OUP 2006); Valerie Braithwaite, Taxing Democracy (n 16).

21 Tom Tyler, ‘Psychological Perspectives’ (n 16); Tom Tyler, Why People Obey the Law (Princeton University Press 2006).

22 IDEA, Electoral Management Design (n 13).

23 Alexis Arieff, ‘Still Standing: Neighbourhood Wars and Political Stability in Guinea’ (2009) 47 The Journal of Modern African Studies 3; TCC, ‘Observing the 2010 Presidential Elections in Guinea: Final Report’ (The Carter Center 2010); Alexis Arieff and Mike McGovern, ‘“History is Stubborn”: Talk about Truth, Justice, and National Reconciliation in the Republic of Guinea’ (2013) 55 Comparative Studies in Society and History 1.

24 ibid.

25 The Guinea example shows that poor relationships may be one component that election observation organisations need to look for to better understand non-confidence or stakeholder agitation. A handbook compiled for and by practitioners in the UNDP and European Commission networks states: ‘Because the EMB is the institution that organises and conducts elections, it is important for it to foster close cooperation with other stakeholders in order to ensure their support for its policies and programmes. Unless the EMB makes a genuine effort to create and sustain sound relations with these stakeholders, there are likely to be misunderstandings and suspicions about its activities, which may ultimately generate lack of public confidence and trust in the electoral process … It is advisable for electoral assistance providers to develop an operational culture that makes electoral assistance responsive to the expectations and needs of its stakeholders and recipients. This is best done through assessment, open dialogue and regular consultation’: Joint EC-UNDP Task Force on Electoral Assistance, ‘Workshop on Effective Electoral Assistance: Participants’ Guidebook’ (2011) <www.ec-undp-electoralassistance.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/undp-contents-publications-workshop-on-effective-electoral-assistance-English.pdf> accessed 13 November 2017.

26 ibid; for wider literature on how social relationships between institutions and citizens matter beyond competence and service delivery, see Putnam (n 7); Mark Suchman, ‘Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches’ (1995) 20(3) Academy of Management Review 571; V Braithwaite and Margaret Levi (n 17); Jennifer Llewellyn and Jocelyn Downie (eds), Being Relational: Reflections on Relational Theory & Health Law (UBC Press 2011).

27 For guidance in how to ‘unpack’ and understand a crisis, we can, in particular, see Bridget Hutter, ‘A Risk Regulation Perspective on Regulatory Excellence’ in Cary Coglianese (ed), Achieving Regulatory Excellence (Brookings Institution Press 2016); Bridget Hutter, Anticipating Risks and Organising Risk Regulation (Cambridge University Press 2010). In organisational and management studies, we can look for what we would expect to find in robust institutions that avoid crisis, or who manage it well if it occurs. For example, that organisations with sustained leadership skills and high levels of internal trust, via allowing smooth cooperation, delegation and communication, are more likely to successfully navigate crises: Aniel Mishra, ‘Organisational Responses to Crisis: The Centrality of Trust’ in Roderick M Kramer and Tom R Tyler (eds), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research (Sage 1996). They avoid panic and see a crisis as an opportunity for outreach and explanation, for building internal cohesion, for post-event reflection and reform: see also Suchman (n 26).

28 For a practitioner friendly guide to mixed method choices and possible constellations, depending on purpose, see John Creswell and Vicki Piano Clark, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nd edn, Sage 2010).

29 A journalistic technique whereby each answer from an interviewee generates a new why question.

30 For more detail on current election observation methods, see e.g. OSCE/ODIHR, Election Observation Handbook (5th edn, OSCE/ODIHR 2005). For more detail on the obligations that elections are assessed against, see The Carter Center, ‘Election Obligations and Standards: A Carter Center Assessment Manual’ (The Carter Center 2014) <https://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/peace/democracy/cc-oes-handbook-10172014.pdf> accessed 13 November 2017.; IDEA, ‘International Obligations for Elections: Guidelines for Legal Frameworks’ (International IDEA 2014) <www.idea.int/publications/catalogue/international-obligations-elections-guidelines-legal-frameworks> accessed 13 November 2017; The Carter Center, Database of obligations <eos.cartercenter.com> accessed 10 July 2017.

31 For literature on the linkage between frontline officers and institutional legitimacy in the eye of stakeholders, see Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy (Russell Sage Foundation 1980) or Llewellyn and Downie (n 26).

32 Such rosters include those run by Folke Bernadotte Akademi in Sweden and by NORDEM in Norway.

33 Anthropologists look for the larger picture in their observation of everyday interactions. Sally Engle Merry describes the dynamics of local-global interaction in 'Crossing Boundaries: Ethnography in the Twenty-First Century' (2000) 23 Political and Legal Anthropology in the Twenty-First Century 2.

34 For an introduction to the principles and techniques of participant observation see Norman Denzin and Yvonna Lincoln, The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (4 ed Sage 2011); for interpreting data see Carol Grbich, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction (Sage Publications 2007/13).

35 This example is reasonably typical of election administration in countries with societal rifts in combination with electoral reforms. In Kenya 2013, both the voter identification (EVID) and count transmission technology arrived the week before the election – allowing no time for familiarisation: see EU EOM, European Union Election Observation Mission to Kenya General Elections 2013: Final Report (2013) <www-eods.eu/library/eu-eom-kenya-final-report-en-pdf> accessed 10 November 2017. In Tunisian post-Arab spring elections, legislation and subsequently procedures are consistently delayed, given to the district electoral offices sometimes only days or even hours before the event.

36 Global Commission on Elections, Democracy & Security (n 3).