Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals

Abstract

Electoral management bodies (EMBs) perform many functions crucial to promoting electoral integrity, from registering voters to resolving post-election disputes. The capacity of an EMB to perform its tasks, however, is difficult to measure in cross-national perspective. Data on resources and personnel provide only a partial picture of EMB capacity and expert surveys are limited in their comparability. This article presents a new proxy for measuring EMB capacity. It employs a content analysis of EMB websites in 99 countries to measure the presence of indicators of their major functions. It assesses the measurement validity of this new measure of capacity and conducts a small-scale test to determine whether EMBs that score highly do actively communicate with their citizens. An application of this new measure of EMB capacity demonstrates its importance in predicting overall electoral integrity, indicating its importance for future scholarly and policy research.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

Reference

Adcock Robert, Collier David (2001) Measurement Validity: A shared standard for qualitative and quantitative research. The American Political Science Review 95(3): 529–546.
Atkeson Lonna Rae, Alvarez R Michael, Hall Thad E (2015) Voter Confidence: How to measure it and how it differs from government support. Election Law Journal 14(3): 207–219.
Birch Sarah (2008) Electoral Institutions and Popular Confidence in Electoral Processes: A cross–national analysis. Electoral Studies 27(2): 305–320.
Bollen Kenneth A (1980) Issues in the Comparative Measurement of Political Democracy. American Sociological Review 45(3): 370–390.
Carmines Edward G, Zeller Richard A (1979) Reliability and Validity Assessment, Vol. 17. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Catt Helena, Ellis Andrew, Maley Michael, Wall Alan, Wolf Peter (2014) Electoral Management Design. Stockholm: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
Christensen Robert K, Gazley Beth (2008) Capacity for Public Administration: Analysis of meaning and measurement. Public Administration and Development 28(4): 265–279.
Clark Alistair (2014) Investing in Electoral Management. In Frank Richard W, Norris Pippa, i Coma Ferran Martinez (eds), Advancing Electoral Integrity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clark Alistair (2016) Identifying the Determinants of Electoral Integrity and Administration in Advanced Democracies: The case of Britain. European Political Science Review 9(3): 471–492.
Collier David, Seawright Jason, LaPorte Jody (2012) Putting Typologies to Work: Concept formation, measurement, and analytic rigor. Political Research Quarterly 65(1): 217–232.
Coppedge Michael, Gerring John, Lindberg Staffan I, Skaaning Svend-Erik, Teorell Jan, Altman David, Andersson Frida, Bernhard Michael, Fish M. Steven, Glynn Adam, Hicken Allen, Knutsen Carl Henrik, McMann Kelly, Mechkova Valeriya, Miri Farhad, Paxton Pamela, Pemstein Daniel, Sigman Rachel, Staton Jeffrey, Zimmerman Brigitte (2016) V–Dem Codebook v6. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2951018
Downey Ed, Ekstromand Carl D, Jones Matthew A (eds) (2011) E–Government Website Development: Future Trends and Strategic Models. Hershy: IGI Global.
Eisinger Peter (2002) Organizational Capacity and Organizational Effectiveness among Street-Level Food Assistance Programs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 31(1): 115–130.
Elkins Zachary (2000) Gradations of Democracy? Empirical Tests of Alternative Conceptualizations. American Journal of Political Science 44(2): 293–300.
Garnett Holly Ann (2017) Electoral Management Roles and Responsibilities in Comparative Perspective, Paper presented at the Australian Political Studies Association Annual Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
Hardouin Jean-Benoit, Bonnaud-Antignac Angelique, Sebille Veronique (2011) Nonparametric Item Response Theory Using Stata. The Stata Journal 11(1): 30–51.
Hartlyn Jonathan, McCoy Jennifer, Mustillo Thomas M (2008) Electoral Governance Matters: Explaining the Quality of Elections in Contemporary Latin America. Comparative Political Studies 41(1): 73–98.
Herron Erik S, Boyko Nazar, Thunberg Michael E (2017) Serving Two Masters: Professionalization versus corruption in Ukraine’s Election Administration. Governance 30(4): 601–619.
Hill Kim Quaile, Hanna Stephen, Shafqat Sahar (1997) The Liberal–Conservative Ideology of U.S. Senators: A new measure. American Journal of Political Science 41(4): 1395–1413.
Hollyer James R, Rosendorff B Peter, Vreeland James Raymond (2014) Measuring Transparency. Political Analysis 22: 413–434.
IFES and UNDP (2005) Getting to the CORE: A Global Surey on the Cost of Registration and Elections. Available at: http://aceproject.org/ero-en/misc/undp-ifes-getting-to-the-core-a-global-survey-on/view
International Telecommunication Union (2014) The World in 2014: ICT Facts and Figures. Available at: http://www.itu.int/en/ITU–D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFactsFigures2014–e.pdf
James Toby S (2016) The Effects of Centralising Electoral Management Board Design. Policy Studies. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01442872.2016.1213802
King Gary, Keohane Robert O, Verba Sidney (1994) Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Lipset Seymour Martin (1959) Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review 53(1): 69–105.
Maestas Cherie (2016) Expert Surveys as a Measurement Tool: Challenges and New Frontiers. In Atkeson Lonna Rae, Alvarez R Michael (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Polling and Polling Methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martinez i Coma Ferran, van Ham Carolien (2015) Can Experts Judge Elections? Testing the Validity of Expert Judgments for Measuring Election Integrity. European Journal of Political Research 52(2): 305–325.
Norris Pippa (2001) Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Norris Pippa (2015) Why Elections Fail. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Norris Pippa, Nai Alessandro, Karp Jeffrey (2016) Electoral Learning and Capacity Building (ELECT) Data. Available at: https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/MQCI3U
Norris Pippa, Frank Richard W, i Coma Ferran Martinez (2014) Measuring Electoral Integrity around the World: A new dataset. PS: Political Science and Politics 47(4): 789–798
O’Loughlin Michael G (1990) What is Bureaucratic Accountability and How can We Measure It? Administration and Society 22: 275–302.
Thomas Paul EJ, Loewen Peter John, Mackenzie Michael K (2013) Fair Isn’t Always Equal: Constituency population and the quality of representation in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science 46(2): 273–293.
van Aaken Anne (2009) Independent Electoral Management Bodies and International Election Observer Missions: Any impact on the observed level of democracy? A conceptual framework. Constitutional Political Economy 20: 296–322.
van Ham Carolien, Lindberg Staffan (2015) When Guardians Matter Most: Exploring the conditions under which electoral management body institutional design affects election integrity. Irish Political Studies 30(4): 454–481.
van Schuur WH (2003) Mokken Scale Analysis: Between the Guttman scale and parametric item response theory. Political Analysis 11(2): 139–163.

Biographies

Holly Ann Garnett is an assistant professor of political science at the Royal Military College of Canada. Her research examines how electoral integrity can be strengthened throughout the electoral cycle, including the role of electoral management bodies, electoral assistance, voter registration, convenience voting measures, election technologies, civic literacy and campaign finance. She is a co-convener of the Electoral Management Network (www.electoralmanagement.com).

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.