Local Elections Manilla Nov 2004 Larsen

Local Democracy: Electoral Systems and Representation in Decentralized Governance: 

Local Democracy: Electoral Systems and Representation in Decentralized Governance Henrik Fredborg Larsen Policy Advisor, Decentralization and Local Governance Bangkok Regional Centre, UNDP Global Elections Workshop, Manila 15-18 November 2004

Content : 

Content Background: constitutional/legal basis and key factors influencing design Local electoral systems and representation – key design issues and their outcomes Management of local elections UNDP role in providing policy advice and supporting local elections

Legal basis and key factors influencing design: 

Legal basis and key factors influencing design Constitutional/legal basis of local electoral systems The extent to which local electoral systems are enshrined in the constitution varies dramatically. Example: India and Sri Lanka vs. Nepal and the Maldives. The framework provided by acts and regulation also has varying levels of detail. Local electoral systems often reflect: Traditional types of village organization were the building blocks of ‘formal’ local governance systems. Example: East Timor. Elected councils at district/sub-district level grafted onto systems of deconcentrated governance (local administrators). Examples (recent): Maldives and Bhutan. Colonial traditions influenced post-independence design. National level: the same electoral system is often applied at local and central level (South Asia, except Bhutan).

Local Electoral Systems:Key Design Issues: 

Local Electoral Systems: Key Design Issues Political parties at local level? South Asia: political parties in India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka; local elections in Pakistan are on a non-party basis. Sri Lanka and Indonesia: very strong party organization; national parties promoted in Indonesia vs. constituency based parties in other countries (e.g. present reforms in Vietnam). Strengths and weaknesses; outcomes of de facto party based elections when ‘non-party’ basis.

Local Electoral Systems:Key Design Issues (2): 

Local Electoral Systems: Key Design Issues (2) Direct elections at all levels? South Asia: direct elections for all levels in India and Sri Lanka – elections for lowest level in the other five countries with the heads of these LGs making up the members at higher levels. Direct or indirect election of chairperson? Often direct election at lowest level and elected by members at higher levels (SA); BGL (Zila) and Maldives – appointed by CG/President. By winning political party in Sri Lanka. Joint ballot for chair and vice chair in Pakistan.

Local Electoral Systems:Key Design Issues (3): 

Local Electoral Systems: Key Design Issues (3) Reservation of seats for women/vulnerable groups? Provisions for women in all SA countries except Bhutan Disadvantaged groups/castes (e.g. Nepal); religious (e.g. non-Muslim in Pakistan); social (e.g. peasants and workers in Pakistan); youth (Sri Lanka) – provisions to ensure representation in most countries In many cases indirectly elected by elected members but direct elections in some countries. Formal requirements vs. incentives for parties to become ‘pan-ethnic’ and promote women candidates; or separate election/electoral rolls for women and vulnerable groups.

Local Electoral Systems:Key Design Issues (4): 

Local Electoral Systems: Key Design Issues (4) Representation of non-elected members? In some cases provisions for representation of MPs and officials, interest groups, and people with special skills/knowledge (mainly urban LGs). Most often ex-officio, non-voting. Central government representation/-control: MPs/officials; appointing chair (e.g. BGL); chaired by CG representative (e.g. Maldives)

Translating votes into seats in local governments: electoral systems: 

Translating votes into seats in local governments: electoral systems Council: FPTP, PR (open/closed list) or mixed systems Chairperson: FPTP, Alternative Vote, Supplementary Vote, Two Rounds Variations from country to country; in some cases different systems at different level (e.g. Bhutan and Pakistan) or for urban and rural local governments. Majority FPTP in South Asia and typically same electoral system at national and local level (or at least same ‘family’).

Outcomes of local electoral systems: 

Outcomes of local electoral systems Very different outcomes with respect to: Representation of women, ethnic and vulnerable groups. Accountability to electorate Division of power between chair and council – and between chair and vice chair Functionality of local elected governments Etc.

Management of local elections: 

Management of local elections Elections for lower levels of local government often managed by local officials (e.g. Bangladesh, Bhutan) or higher levels of local or regional/state government (e.g. Sri Lanka); in other cases by the elections committee (e.g. Nepal). The role of electoral bodies varies from full management responsibility to supervision and guidance.

UNDP Policy Advice and Practice Development: 

UNDP Policy Advice and Practice Development Support for decentralized governance in 143 countries (2003) but limited involvement in local elections and representation (e.g. 5-7 countries in Asia-Pacific) When involved it is most often in electoral management (often add-on to national support) rather than in design of system and analysis of outcomes. One of the four main components of Dandamp;LG SL (2.6): national framework for political decentralization and local participatory processes. UNDP must increase its support for sub-national elections and referenda in order to broaden the base of democracy and reinforce decentralization processes that seek to empower people, particularly the poor, at the community level (UNDP and Electoral Assistance: Ten Years of Experience).

UNDP Policy Advice and Practice Development (2): 

UNDP Policy Advice and Practice Development (2) Electoral competition has a large impact on pro-poor service outcomes to achieve the MDGs. The impact of decentralization on informed voting and political credibility can to in either direction. Positive impact when (i) political promises are – at large - more credible than when made at central level and (ii) voters are likely to use information about quality of local public goods in making voting decisions. New Regional Governance Programme in Asia – component one: ‘increased effectiveness of representative bodies at central and sub-national levels to perform their democratic functions’. Increasing focus on practice development (incl. south-south learning), policy advice and advocacy on systems for local election and representation.