This article makes an assessment of the nationwide automation of the 2010 and 2013 synchronized elections in the Philippines from a viewpoint of election administration. It first reviews the traditional manual system of pre-automation, identifies its problems regarding fraud and inefficiency, and traces the historical process of introducing Information and Communication Technology (ICT) into election administration in the country. On the basis of both quantitative and qualitative data obtained from election and other statistics, various published and unpublished materials, interviews and field visits, the article then examines the 2010 and 2013 election automation in its four phases, namely, (1) voter registration, (2) voting, (3) tallying, and (4) data consolidation, and makes an assessment in terms of three frames of reference, namely, (1) voting right protection, (2) fraud prevention, and (3) administrative rationality which includes accuracy, efficiency, and economy. Finally, the article argues that, although it had many problems, the automation as implemented in the two sets of elections should be considered a success in the sense that it managed elections much better than the previous manual system.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 427 | 82 | 8 |
Full Text Views | 3 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 14 | 3 | 0 |
This article makes an assessment of the nationwide automation of the 2010 and 2013 synchronized elections in the Philippines from a viewpoint of election administration. It first reviews the traditional manual system of pre-automation, identifies its problems regarding fraud and inefficiency, and traces the historical process of introducing Information and Communication Technology (ICT) into election administration in the country. On the basis of both quantitative and qualitative data obtained from election and other statistics, various published and unpublished materials, interviews and field visits, the article then examines the 2010 and 2013 election automation in its four phases, namely, (1) voter registration, (2) voting, (3) tallying, and (4) data consolidation, and makes an assessment in terms of three frames of reference, namely, (1) voting right protection, (2) fraud prevention, and (3) administrative rationality which includes accuracy, efficiency, and economy. Finally, the article argues that, although it had many problems, the automation as implemented in the two sets of elections should be considered a success in the sense that it managed elections much better than the previous manual system.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 427 | 82 | 8 |
Full Text Views | 3 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 14 | 3 | 0 |