How the use of technology enhances transparency

“Why do we want transparent elections? To build a basis of trust.” 

That was one of the main statements given by Smartmatic´s Fernando Hernandez during his conference at the 6th International Electoral Affairs Symposium held on Mauritius on May 29.

The event, organized by the International Centre for Parliamentary Studies, addressed topics such as the management and logistics of elections, best practice procedures, voter registration, voting methods, the use of new and innovative technologies in elections and examine current trends, in terms of usage throughout the electoral process.

During his presentation Hernandez emphasized the need to develop and reinforce relationships with key stakeholders such as: voters, political parties, state institutions, NGO and international organizations, other countries and business groups.  

Technology can become a useful tool when it comes to increasing electoral transparency. It allows for a wider coverage of all the processes involved, collecting large amounts of data, real-time monitoring and analysis of events and processes, and in consequence, faster results. 

Hernandez cited the Filipino elections held earlier this year on May 13th as an example of how technology enhances transparency. In a territory comprised of more than 7,000 islands, some 82,000 optical scanners were used to cast 766,672,141 and to elect 18,022 officials. Thanks to a technological platform that included e-counting, and the secure transmission of data to tallying centers, results were made available to the public via internet in record time.

Voting technology also minimizes human interaction, thus providing an appropriate environment to perform non-biased operations while supporting voters. Last October, Belgium tried out a new e-voting system that lets voters certify by themselves, via a printed record of the vote, that their ballots were counted correctly. Also, thanks to a 17" touch screen, the voting process was considerably simplified. In some cases, the selection process involved 182 candidates, manual voting in Belgium is just inconvenient.

If used correctly, with a proper legal framework, technology can indeed help improve transparency. Transparency is ensuring that during an election, all stakeholders are able to measure its success based on precise and real information, and technology is the perfect ally to achieve this.

How rational are voters when it comes to confidence in electoral results?

Image: http://www.e-commercefacts.com

It is nowadays commonplace to say that "Elections are the cornerstone of any democracy". However, in order for elections to be conducive to legitimate results and to help preserving democratic institutions, voters need to be confident that they are fairly conducted processes.

Now, confidence is tricky element of election administration as not all variables that condition it are under the control of the electoral commissions.

A Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES), carried out between the late 1990s and early 2000s in 31 countries around the world measured confidence in their elections. Denmark lead the chart scoring 89%. The US ranked in the middle with 49% while South Korea was at the bottom. This study serves as a great benchmark for election administrators trying to improve transparency, efficiency and accuracy in the eyes of their constituents.

More recently, a study by the PEW Charitable Trust, published in February 2012, and called
Election Administration By The Numbers reveals an interesting fact regarding the confidence of US voters on their electoral systems: when it comes to evaluating election administration, people are far less rational than one would imagine.

Three conclusions drawn from the research project are the basis for such assertion. They are:

1. A considerable amount of Americans do not think the election system reflects the will of the voters.
2. Americans tend to believe results in their community better reflect the will of voter than national results.
3. Voters tend to judge accuracy of results using a partisan lens.

This third point is particularly interesting as it might explain a worldwide tendency of fraud claiming by losing candidates. Data shows that many American voters trust the election system’s integrity when their candidate has won. The following table illustrates this point. In 2004, Bush, a Republican, was re-elected, but in 2008 President Obama, a democrat won the presidency. 2010 was an election favorable for the Republicans.

The bottom line in all of this is that voters seem to be less objective than many of us had previously thought. Election administrators need to not only improve the actual state of the election administration, but also, they need to work on the perception of the processes. As the old adagio says, "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion".