Published Article

ABSTRACT

Electoral reform is a broad term that covers, among other things, improving the responsiveness of electoral processes to public desires and expectations. However, not all electoral change can be considered electoral reform. Electoral change can only be referred to as reform if its primary goal is to improve electoral processes. The simultaneous implementation of major reforms in a range of different areas can place a great burden on an EMB, and will increase the risk of suboptimal implementation, especially when deadlines are tight. While sound implementation has the potential to meet intended targets, and hopefully to build confidence and trust in the effectiveness of elections and the EMB, failed implementation can have the opposite effect. This will be especially problematic if reforms are pursued without strong political support across the board; opponents of a particular initiative are likely be looking for opportunities to characterize it as a failure, and to push for its abandonment. Reforms to electoral processes may be triggered by a failure to deliver acceptable elections or by conflict resulting from disputed elections. Unless an EMB maintains a process for reviewing its administrative strategies, policies, procedures and practices, it will become less effective, as it will have no mechanism to deal with change in its legal, stakeholder, technological, financial and social environments.