Electronic Voting and Democracy 2004
DOI: 10.1057/9780230523531_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electronic Voting in the United Kingdom: Lessons and Limitations from the UK Experience

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…e-partycypacja może prowadzić do indywidualizacji, co nie zawsze jest korzystne z punktu widzenia procesu politycznego 27 . Na przykład e-głosowanie eliminuje wpływ instytucji zbiorowych i pewne symboliczne wartości związane z obecnością w lokalu wyborczym, co może prowadzić do mniej refleksyjnego głosowania 28 .…”
Section: Krytyka E-partycypacjiunclassified
“…e-partycypacja może prowadzić do indywidualizacji, co nie zawsze jest korzystne z punktu widzenia procesu politycznego 27 . Na przykład e-głosowanie eliminuje wpływ instytucji zbiorowych i pewne symboliczne wartości związane z obecnością w lokalu wyborczym, co może prowadzić do mniej refleksyjnego głosowania 28 .…”
Section: Krytyka E-partycypacjiunclassified
“…The second problem has been that a number of electoral fraud incidents involving postal voting have put the whole electoral modernisation exercise under the national media spotlight, with negative effects for e-voting (Electoral Commission 2007;Wilks-Heeg 2009). Another important point is that, in contrast to other countries in which the state ultimately owns the final e-voting system, the UK adopted a pro-market experimental approach to e-voting by putting in place a series of market incentives for commercial suppliers to bear some of the financial risk associated with the outlay of e-voting (Pratchett and Wingfield 2004).…”
Section: United Kingdommentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many participants are critical about the ability of the government to learn from the pilots (Pratchett and Wingfield, 2004). Louise Ferguson criticises the pilots for mainly three things:the government has not learnt from the pilots: they just run another pilot like the last pilot;the reports of the pilots were very constrained, and problems were not mentioned in the published reports (only mentioned informally, in private conversations); andthere is still insufficient time allowed for the roll‐out of the new pilots[10].The government does not see any problems in doing more of the same, because this allows more learning to take place.…”
Section: Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the information age, temptation to modernise the process of electing representatives is increasing. Electronic forms of voting have been implemented at some scale in many different countries, though in very different ways (Gibson, 2001; Pratchett and Wingfield, 2004; Rezende, 2004; Breuer and Trechsel, 2006; Hermans and Twist, 2007). Various publications have addressed the benefits and risks of e‐voting systems (Mohen and Glidden, 2001; Phillips and Von Spakovsky, 2001; Alvarez and Hall, 2004; Jacobs and Hubbers, 2004; Kohno et al , 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%