Electoral administration and the problem of poll worker recruitment: Who volunteers, and why?

Elections depend on the thousands of people who give up their time to administer this crucial public service. They staff polling stations and ensure votes are issued, cast and counted. Poll workers are effectively ‘stipended volunteers’, receiving some limited financial compensation, but working for the broader public good. It is important to understand why people choose to give up their time to provide this fundamental public service to their fellow citizens. Using original data from a poll worker survey conducted in the 2015 British general election, this article investigates the motivations and incentives for poll workers volunteering to administer major elections in an important advanced democracy. Exploratory expectations are set out about the motivations of poll workers, and the relationship to their socio-economic characteristics, and levels of social capital and satisfaction with democracy. Contrary to expectations, the findings note that, earning some extra money is important to many, although motivations are more broadly structured around solidary, purposive and material motivations. The article establishes a range of relationships between each set of incentives, and poll workers’ socio-economic, social capital and satisfaction profiles

Explaining variation in the implementation of global norms:Gender mainstreaming of security in the OSCE and the EU

Why do regional security organizations choose different approaches to implementing global gender norms? To address this question, we examine how the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the European Union (EU) integrated requirements derived from UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSCR 1325) on women, peace and security into their security policies. We identify differences in scope and dynamics between the change processes in the two organizations. The OSCE simply adapted its existing gender policy and has not changed it since, whereas the EU introduced a new, more extensive and specific policy, which it has already amended several times. Drawing on historical institutionalism and feminist institutionalism, we found that, first, reform coalitions prepared the ground for gender mainstreaming in the organizations’ respective security policies; and that, second, embedded policy structures, including rules and norms about external interaction as well as existing policy legacies, were responsible for the different approaches of the EU and OSCE with respect to UNSCR 1325

Back to square one? An analysis of the 2014 General Elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina

This paper discusses the results of the recent elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina in October 2014. It does so by engaging with the results and what they mean for a number of selected policy areas in the country. The research is based on the statistics of the Electoral Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina and on the experience of Drs Keil and Perry, who have been working on Bosnia for many years, Dr Keil as an academic and Dr Perry as a practitioner, including for the OSCE and the International Law and Policy Group

Voting 'against all' in postcommunist Russia

Since the early 1990s voters in Russia (and most of the other post-Soviet republics) have been offered the opportunity to vote ‘against all’ parties and candidates. Increasing numbers have done so. The evidence of two post-election surveys indicates that ‘against all’ voters are younger than other voters, more urban and more highly educated. They do not reject liberal democracy, but are critical of the contemporary practice of Russian politics and find no parties that adequately reflect their views. With the ending of the ‘against all’ facility in 2006 and other changes in the Russian electoral system under the Putin presidency, levels of turnout are likely to fall further and the protest vote will seek other outlets within or outside the parliamentary system

After personalism: rethinking power transfers in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan

What happens to elites when the personalistic leader they supported for so long suddenly dies? This article tackles comparatively transitions out of first presidencies in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, presenting an analytical framework that seeks to explain why these transitions unfolded in relatively smooth fashion. The overall stability defining power transfer processes instigated by the non-violent death of personalistic rulers in both contexts is explained here through the intersection of three key factors: the regimes’ resort to succession practices consolidated in the Soviet era, the emergence of temporary forms of collective decision-making in both transitional contexts, and the implementation of de-personalisation strategies pursuing the obliteration of specific pockets of cadres but stopping short of wider regime re-organisation. The findings of this article contribute to broader debates on the politics of de-personalisation, while putting forward a comprehensive framework to analyse transitions out of personalism in and beyond post-Soviet Eurasia