2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2015.06.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effects of technical parties and partisan election management bodies on voting outcomes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The lottery mechanism encouraged ambitious politicians to create and/or collaborate with minor parties to “stack the deck” on the commissions. Ukraine's inchoate party system, low barriers for party registration, and ease of access to election administration create incentives for resource‐rich parties to maintain small parties (called “technical parties”) that may gain access to election administration positions via the lottery system (see Boyko and Herron ; Boyko, Herron, and Sverdan ). While the formal rules only permit a party or candidate to have one representative on the commissions, supporting technical parties creates opportunities to control more members of the commissions.…”
Section: Election Administration In Ukrainementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lottery mechanism encouraged ambitious politicians to create and/or collaborate with minor parties to “stack the deck” on the commissions. Ukraine's inchoate party system, low barriers for party registration, and ease of access to election administration create incentives for resource‐rich parties to maintain small parties (called “technical parties”) that may gain access to election administration positions via the lottery system (see Boyko and Herron ; Boyko, Herron, and Sverdan ). While the formal rules only permit a party or candidate to have one representative on the commissions, supporting technical parties creates opportunities to control more members of the commissions.…”
Section: Election Administration In Ukrainementioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, the integrity of elections is highly questionable compared to other continents (Norris, Frank and Martínez, 2014). Studies show that biased and incompetent EMBs are unlikely to deliver credible outcomes (Boyko and Herron, 2015). Likewise, election results in many African countries have been contested by the losing side, mostly the opposition.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, according to Hyde (2011a) Schedler 2013). Research agenda extends to electoral integrity in recent years (Norris, 2013), has noticed improvements in electoral quality and administrative processes (Birch, 2012;Alvarez et al, 2013), observation to prevent improper behaviour (Kelley, 2012;Herron, 2010), systematically analyse election administration impact to results at the polling station (Boyko & Herron, 2015) because at the local level (White, Nathan, & Faller, 2015), election organizer have the flexibility to manage electoral systems due to the lack of monitoring, time and resource constraints (Burden et al, 2012; General elections rules about quality and integrity is necessary to improve rules by adding a rule, purpose affirmation and synchronization between the legislation. One of them is through complaints instruments creation for complete, accessible, open and fair electoral violations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%