Outsourcing Democracy: Losing Control of E-Voting in the Netherlands

Outsourcing IT services is a common practice for many governments. This case study shows that outsourcing of elections is not without risk. Studying electronic voting in the Netherlands through documents obtained with Freedom of Information requests, we see that government agencies at both local and national level lacked the necessary knowledge and capability to identify appropriate voting technology, to develop and enforce proper security requirements, and to monitor performance. Furthermore, over the 20 years that e-voting was used in the Netherlands, the public sector became so dependent on the private sector that a situation evolved where Dutch government lost ownership and control over both the e-voting system and the election process.

[1]  Donald P. Moynihan,et al.  Building Secure Elections: E-Voting, Security, and Systems Theory , 2004 .

[2]  P. Bradwell,et al.  FYI: the new politics of personal information , 2007 .

[3]  Eric Wustrow,et al.  Security analysis of India's electronic voting machines , 2010, CCS '10.

[4]  Antonio Cordella,et al.  Outsourcing, bureaucracy and public value: Reappraising the notion of the "contract state" , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[5]  James L. Perry,et al.  Outsourcing for E-Government , 2003 .

[6]  Leontine Loeber,et al.  E-Voting in the Netherlands; from General Acceptance to General Doubt in Two Years , 2008, Electronic Voting.

[7]  Robin Gauld,et al.  Dangerous Enthusiasms: E-government, Computer Failure and Information System Development , 2006 .

[8]  I.Th.M. Snellen,et al.  Public administration in an information age : a handbook , 1998 .

[9]  A. Oostveen.  Context Matters. A Social Informatics Perspective on the Design and Implications of Large-Scale e-Government Systems , 2003 .

[10]  Joshua I Gold,et al.  Context Matters , 2004, Neuron.

[11]  M. Brown,et al.  A "Smarter, Better, Faster, and Cheaper" Government: Contracting and Geographic Information Systems , 1998 .

[12]  S. Small,et al.  Action-oriented research : models and methods , 1995 .

[13]  Yu-Che Chen,et al.  Transforming local e-government services: the use of application service providers , 2001, Gov. Inf. Q..

[14]  Joe Mohen,et al.  The case for internet voting , 2001, CACM.

[15]  Ariel J. Feldman,et al.  Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine , 2007, EVT.

[16]  Yan Ji.  Voting by Confidence , 2005 .

[17]  R. Michael Alvarez,et al.  The Likely Consequences of Internet Voting for Political Representation , 2001 .

[18]  S. Wilks‐Heeg.  'Purity of Elections in the UK: Causes for Concern' , 2008 .

[19]  R. Gibson,et al.  Elections Online: Assessing Internet Voting in Light of the Arizona Democratic Primary , 2001 .

[20]  Ann Macintosh,et al.  E-electoral administration: organizational lessons learned from the deployment of e-voting in the UK , 2005, DG.O.

[21]  M.J.W. van Twist,et al.  Stemmachines: een verweesd dossier , 2007 .

[22]  Pippa Norris,et al.  e-Voting as the magic ballot for European Parliamentary elections? Evaluating e-voting in the light of experiments in UK local elections , 2004 .

[23]  Rop Gonggrijp,et al.  Studying the Nedap/Groenendaal ES3B Voting Computer: A Computer Security Perspective , 2007, EVT.

[24]  Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko,et al.  Encyclopedia of Digital Government , 2006 .

[25]  A. Oostveen.  CITIZENS AND ACTIVISTS , 2010 .

[26]  Katarina Stanoevska-Slabeva,et al.  Towards the E-Society: E-Commerce, E-Business, and E-Government , 2013 .

[27]  Alexander H. Trechsel.  E-voting and Electoral Participation , 2007 .

[28]  Hans A. von Spakovsky,et al.  Gauging the risks of internet elections , 2001, CACM.

[29]  Paul R. Verkuil.  Outsourcing Sovereignty: Why Privatization of Government Functions Threatens Democracy and What We Can Do about It , 2007 .