Foundations of Comparative Politics - Study Notes on Elections and Electoral Systems

FOUNDATIONS OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS

Key Focus: Discussion of elections and electoral systems, particularly how they impact democratic processes.
Importance of international factors and organizations in electoral reforms.

Role of International Organizations: International organizations such as the Carter Center, OSCE, AU, OAS, and EU have taken significant roles in monitoring elections over the past three decades.
- Their presence is aimed at deterring electoral fraud by conducting observation missions.
- Observation missions have mostly become common, and few elections lack them as of late.
Effectiveness Debate: The effectiveness of these missions is debatable; some studies indicate that electoral irregularities may be lower in observed polling stations (Hyde 2007a, b), while others suggest that fraud is displaced from observed locations to unmonitored ones (Ichino and Schiindeln 2012).
Perception of Impartiality: Observer missions can sometimes be seen as partisan; for instance:
- The OSCE and an American delegation had conflicting reports regarding Azerbaijan's presidential election in 2013 (Norris 2014).
- Observer missions may understate electoral fraud due to political pressures, such as wanting to be invited back for future elections or preventing violence.

Institutional Design:
- There is an argument that power-sharing institutions result in higher electoral integrity than systems that concentrate power (Lijphart 2004; Norris 2015).
- Power-sharing creates checks and balances and encourages minority group participation.
- However, others argue that these systems complicate accountability and reinforce divisions.
Electoral Management Bodies (EMBs):
- EMBs are responsible for administering elections and ensuring fairness.
- Their independence from the executive and technical capability are crucial for high-quality elections.
- The incentives to strengthen these organizations often lie with opposition groups rather than incumbents.

Variety of Electoral Systems: Different systems define how votes are translated into seats, and understanding each system is crucial for comprehending their implications on democracy.
- Key classifications include majoritarian and proportional systems based on their electoral formulas.

Single-Member District Plurality (SMDP) System:
- Commonly utilized in countries such as the UK, US, Canada, and India.
- Voters cast one vote; the candidate with the most votes wins, even without a majority.
- Simplicity of SMDP makes it user-friendly for voters and administrators, enhancing accountability due to one representative per district.
- Example: Ben Howlett of the Conservative Party won in the Bath constituency with only 37.8% of the votes, indicating potential unrepresentative outcomes.
- Critics argue SMDP systems can produce unrepresentative results nationally, as seen with the Alliance in the 1983 UK elections, which received a substantial percentage of votes but limited seats.
- SMDP systems may lead to strategic voting, where voters select candidates they perceive as viable rather than their true preference.
- They can also encourage ethnic party dominance due to regional concentrations, resulting in fewer appeals across cultural lines.

Single Nontransferable Vote (SNTV):
- Used in multi-member districts where voters choose one candidate, and the highest vote-getters are elected.
- Tends to produce better outcomes for smaller parties compared to SMDP.
- Examples noted include historical use in Japan and Taiwan.
- Issues include encouraging intraparty competition and personal campaigns over partisan appeals, often leading to fragmentation in legislatures.
- The SNTV also leads to clientelistic behaviors due to the guarantee of election with minimal votes under certain circumstances.

Alternative Vote (AV):
- A system demanding candidates to obtain an absolute majority, where voters rank candidates in order of preference.
- Used generally in single-member districts; if no majority is achieved in the initial count, the lowest candidates are eliminated and their votes redistributed until a winner emerges.
- Australian elections exemplify this system, with the Richmond constituency illustrated in the voting process.
- Strengths: Higher representation of preferences and lesser strategic voting than SMDP.
- Weaknesses include complexity, potential voter confusion, and criticism that winners may not represent the genuine majority.

Majority-Runoff Two-Round System (TRS):
- Allows voters to select candidates who only need a simple majority in the first round, proceeding to a runoff if no candidate meets the mark.
- Commonly used in presidential elections across many nations.
- Advantages: Provides voters a second chance to affect election outcomes, reduces strategic voting, promotes broad candidate appeal.
- Disadvantages: Higher costs for administration and potential drop in voter turnout between rounds; may still produce disproportional results.

Aimed at achieving direct correlation between the percentage of votes received and the percentage of legislative seats gained.
Includes several systems, prominent examples being list PR systems, which involve parties presenting lists of candidates to voters, with representation translating proportionally based on district vote shares.

List PR Systems:
- Governed by district magnitude, indicating the number of representatives in a given district; larger magnitudes yield greater proportionality.
- Electoral Thresholds: Minimum vote percentage a party needs to gain representation, affecting participation and systemic fragmentation.
- Example: Formal thresholds have been used in countries like Turkey, impacting representation and creating potential disenfranchisement of smaller parties.

Combine elements of majoritarian and proportional systems, using various electoral tiers to balance constituency representation with proportional outcomes.
Such systems can generate two classes of legislators, causing distinct accountability and party unity challenges.

Observations on the distribution of electoral systems reveal trends, e.g., democracies tend to favor proportional systems while dictatorships often employ majoritarian systems.
Electoral systems reflect strategic calculations by political parties and historical legacies.
- Some nations adopt systems influenced by prior colonial rulers, and accidental adoption of reforms can occur under certain political conditions.

Recognizes that the growing use of elections necessitates attention to electoral integrity.
Emphasizes no perfect system exists; improvements depend on the political feasibility of reforms and the interests of various actors involved in the electoral process.
Highlights that the future of electoral reforms will probably depend on the perception and response to political threats and changing societal contexts.