PropertyValue
?:abstract
  • A considerable body of literature has sought to demonstrate the factors that influence electoral system design. However, choices over recognised democratic options must be distinguished from design choices that draw the electoral system away from democratic norms. The latter phenomenon, which may be termed the ‘manipulative design’ of electoral institutions, should be thought of as a form of electoral malpractice. This paper seeks to assess the manipulative design strategies that actors in non- semi- and new democracies employ. Specifically, the paper provides an overview of the most common forms this practice takes. It then goes on to evaluate (1) the prevalence of different forms of manipulative design; (2) the conditions under which actors are likely to seek to engage in electoral system manipulation, and (3) the mechanics of manipulative design. The paper draws on a newly-created dataset of Eastern European, Latin America and Sub-Saharan African cases. The investigation involves both large-N quantitative analysis and case studies. (xsd:string)
?:author
?:comment
  • (CSES) (xsd:string)
?:dataSource
  • CSES-Bibliography (xsd:string)
?:dateModified
  • 2009 (xsd:gyear)
?:datePublished
  • 2009 (xsd:gyear)
?:duplicate
is ?:hasPart of
is ?:mainEntity of
?:name
  • Electoral System Design and Electoral Malpractice (xsd:string)
?:publicationType
  • inproceedings (xsd:string)
?:sourceCollection
  • 5th General Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research (xsd:string)
?:sourceInfo
  • Bibsonomy (xsd:string)
  • In 5th General Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research , 2009 (xsd:string)
?:studyGroup
  • Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) (xsd:string)
?:tags
  • 2009 (xsd:string)
  • CSES (xsd:string)
  • CSES_input2014 (xsd:string)
  • CSES_pro (xsd:string)
  • FDZ_IUP (xsd:string)
  • checked (xsd:string)
  • inproceedings (xsd:string)
  • input2014 (xsd:string)
rdf:type