Thursday, December 31, 2009

Uzbekistan's Parliamentary Election

Uzbekistan held parliamentary elections on Sunday, December 27, 2009 to select deputies for five-year terms. The Central Electoral Commission reports that turnout reached 87.8%. Candidates received a majority in 96 districts, and repeat elections will be held in 39 districts on January 10, 2010. The remaining 15 seats in the recently expanded parliament (increased to 150 seats from 120 last December) are allocated to the new Ecological Movement of Uzbekistan, and at least 30% of seats will be occupied by women due to a gender quota. The CEC has also published excerpts from some assessments of the election. The OSCE declined to participate in election monitoring.

Final results should be certified and published after the second round. While parties have challenged each other in the campaign, they all support President Karimov.

Friday, December 18, 2009

Effects of Election Monitoring via Webcams

Evgeny Morozov's commentary in Foreign Policy about Azerbaijan's use of webcams to monitor elections has prompted some pessimistic online commentary about the conduct of elections in the region. Indeed, Azerbaijan's election quality has been rated poorly by international organizations that monitor campaigns (with the notable exception of the CIS).

Morozov argues the following about the use of webcams:

I don't know how it would hurt, but I don't see how it would help either: unless there are enough cameras to cover the entire voting/counting areas, rigging the results would still not be too hard. If anything, the presence of a Web cam would probably give yet another excuse to validate the results...

His note focuses on the installation of webcams for upcoming municipal elections. However, webcams were in place for the last presidential election and referendum. I have analyzed turnout and outcome data, differentiating among polling stations that installed webcams and those that did not. Officially reported turnout was consistently lower in polling stations that had webcams. The presence of webcams had a less consistent effect on pro-regime outcomes.

What could produce these results? I speculate that election administrators have a reduced incentive to inflate outcomes - especially turnout - when they are being monitored. Some officials were punished for election violations in Azerbaijan's 2000 and 2005 elections. While these officials were likely scapegoated, their punishment potentially sends a message to administrators that they could share the same fate. Placement of a webcam in a polling station raises the possibility of being punished if the footage shows clear evidence of inappropriate behavior. With static cameras that show one view of the polling station, viewers could identify egregious inflation of turnout if the footage were observed consistently over time.

I address other possibilities, and present the statistical analysis, in a research paper available to anyone who is interested. Please contact me at: eherron at and I will forward a copy.

A Long Semester

While the region has featured some important election developments in the last few months (e.g., controversial regional elections in Russia, Moldova's ongoing saga), my over-committed schedule has not permitted me to post regularly. However, I will be covering Ukraine's presidential election in January from Kyiv, and will be following up with some additional research commentary in the coming weeks.