The Comparative Study of Electoral Governance—Introduction

Electoral governance is a crucial variable in securing the credibility of elections in emerging democracies, but remains largely ignored in the comparative study of democratization. This article develops some basic analytical tools to advance comparative analysis and understanding of this neglected topic. It conceptualizes electoral governance as a set of related activities that involves rule making, rule application, and rule adjudication. It identifies the provision of procedural certainty to secure the substantive uncertainty of democratic elections as the principal task of electoral governance. It argues that electoral governance, while socially and institutionally embedded, matters most during the indeterminate conditions that typically attend democratization. Finally, it outlines a research agenda that covers the comparative study of the structures as well as the processes of electoral governance.

[1]  A. Przeworski,et al.  The logic of comparative social inquiry , 1970 .

[2]  J. Elklit,et al.  The Rise of Election Monitoring: What Makes Elections Free and Fair? , 1997 .

[3]  B. Peters,et al.  Governance, Politics and the State , 2000 .

[4]  Martin M. Shapiro,et al.  Courts: A Comparative and Political Analysis , 1983 .

[5]  G. O'donnell.  Illusions About Consolidation , 1996 .

[6]  Civil Society and Political Elections: A Culture of Distrust? , 1999 .

[7]  Xavier Coller,et al.  Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation. Southern Europe, South America and Post-Communist Europe , 1996 .

[8]  Shaheen Mozaffar,et al.  A ‘whole system’ approach to the choice of electoral rules in democratizing countries:: Senegal in comparative perspective , 2002 .

[9]  Andreas Schedler.  Distrust Breeds Bureaucracy: Democratization and the Formal Regulation of Electoral Governance in Mexico , 2001 .

[10]  Thomas Schwartz,et al.  Congressional Oversight Over-looked: Police Patrol versus Fire Alarms , 1984 .

[11]  George Tsebelis.  Nested Games: Rational Choice in Comparative Politics , 1990 .

[12]  Michael C. Munger,et al.  Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems , 1990, American Political Science Review.

[13]  Rafael López-Pintor.  Electoral management bodies as institutions of governance , 2000 .

[14]  A. Gould.  Conflicting Imperatives and Concept Formation , 1999, The Review of Politics.

[15]  R. Pastor.  Mediating Elections: , 1998 .

[16]  Areno Lijphart,et al.  A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies 1945-1990 , 1995 .

[17]  Peter Eigen.  Combatting Corruption Around the World , 1996 .

[18]  Michael Bratton,et al.  Democratic Experiments in Africa: Regime Transitions in Comparative Perspective , 1999 .

[19]  Michael E. Alvarez,et al.  Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990 , 2000 .

[20]  A. Przeworski.  Constitutionalism and Democracy: Democracy as a contingent outcome of conflicts , 1988 .

[21]  Philippe C. Schmitter,et al.  Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies , 1990 .

[22]  B. Geddes.  What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years , 1999 .

[23]  R. Goodin.  Keeping Political Time: The Rhythms of Democracy , 1998 .

[24]  B. Grofman,et al.  Elections in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan under the Single Non-Transferable Vote: The Comparative Study of an Embedded Institution , 1999 .

[25]  R. Taagepera.  How electoral systems matter for democratization , 1998 .

[26]  Gary W. Cox,et al.  Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World's Electoral Systems , 1997 .

[27]  A. Przeworski,et al.  Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and , 2016 .

[28]  Pauline Jones Luong.  After the Break-up , 2000 .

[29]  R. Pastor.  The role of electoral administration in democratic transitions: Implications for policy and research , 1999 .