Psephology series part 6-why do I not analyse every election that comes up?
You may be wondering why I have missed out some elections whilst covering many others.
Writing up electoral analyses for publication is by no means easy, and elections need to be free and fair for the analysis to be a useful indication of why people voted the way they did in that election, and how the demographics affect election results and explain differences between electoral districts, and the effects of personal votes upon voters' choices, and actual choices need to exist. Internationally recognised sovereignty is also important in making sure the election can have an impact and make a significant difference (whether or not it does in the end is another story), as is freedom from internal or external interference.
Elections in some countries do not meet these requirements, meaning that an electoral analysis would not be a useful or reliable indication of the political mood in that country.
The following types of elections are not included in my electoral analyses:
1. Elections in one party states such as North Korea and Vietnam. An election is not a proper election without the existence of a choice between different candidates, meaning elections in one party states are just a sham.
2. Elections with clearly limited suffrage for one reason or another, or where the body being elected is only an advisory body (e.g. consultative councils in absolute monarchies such as Oman and Saudi Arabia)
3. Elections which are widely regarded as rigged or otherwise clearly unfair, whether because of internal or external interference (e.g. in the case of Ukraine, where 26 seats are currently vacant due to Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014). Examples of internal interference in an election include ballot stuffing, preventing large numbers of opposition candidates from running on spurious grounds, and widespread intimidation and bribery of voters, which often result in boycotts of that election by major political parties or alliances.
4. Elections in nations without widespread democratic recognition, such as Abkhazia and the Sahrawi Democratic Republic, as their sovereignty is in dispute internationally. For an election to be effective in a nation, that nation must have an ability to govern its affairs independently.
5. Elections which are nonpartisan or almost entirely nonpartisan, as a comparison between votes for a party or alliance and votes for a candidate are not possible. Furthermore, the few countries with nonpartisan elections (e.g. Nauru, Tuvalu, and almost all British Overseas Territories that actually have a permanent population) also have populations too small for a reliable election analysis.
Substantial malapportionment of constituencies in a country using single member constituencies does not necessarily exclude an election from analysis, as sometimes it can backfire against the governing party or it may not have a significant effect on the final result. Also, there are some exceptional circumstances which may justify the inclusion of an electoral analysis even when it would otherwise be excluded due to one or more of the above criteria.
Writing up electoral analyses for publication is by no means easy, and elections need to be free and fair for the analysis to be a useful indication of why people voted the way they did in that election, and how the demographics affect election results and explain differences between electoral districts, and the effects of personal votes upon voters' choices, and actual choices need to exist. Internationally recognised sovereignty is also important in making sure the election can have an impact and make a significant difference (whether or not it does in the end is another story), as is freedom from internal or external interference.
Elections in some countries do not meet these requirements, meaning that an electoral analysis would not be a useful or reliable indication of the political mood in that country.
The following types of elections are not included in my electoral analyses:
1. Elections in one party states such as North Korea and Vietnam. An election is not a proper election without the existence of a choice between different candidates, meaning elections in one party states are just a sham.
2. Elections with clearly limited suffrage for one reason or another, or where the body being elected is only an advisory body (e.g. consultative councils in absolute monarchies such as Oman and Saudi Arabia)
3. Elections which are widely regarded as rigged or otherwise clearly unfair, whether because of internal or external interference (e.g. in the case of Ukraine, where 26 seats are currently vacant due to Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014). Examples of internal interference in an election include ballot stuffing, preventing large numbers of opposition candidates from running on spurious grounds, and widespread intimidation and bribery of voters, which often result in boycotts of that election by major political parties or alliances.
4. Elections in nations without widespread democratic recognition, such as Abkhazia and the Sahrawi Democratic Republic, as their sovereignty is in dispute internationally. For an election to be effective in a nation, that nation must have an ability to govern its affairs independently.
5. Elections which are nonpartisan or almost entirely nonpartisan, as a comparison between votes for a party or alliance and votes for a candidate are not possible. Furthermore, the few countries with nonpartisan elections (e.g. Nauru, Tuvalu, and almost all British Overseas Territories that actually have a permanent population) also have populations too small for a reliable election analysis.
Substantial malapportionment of constituencies in a country using single member constituencies does not necessarily exclude an election from analysis, as sometimes it can backfire against the governing party or it may not have a significant effect on the final result. Also, there are some exceptional circumstances which may justify the inclusion of an electoral analysis even when it would otherwise be excluded due to one or more of the above criteria.
Comments
Post a Comment