Can internet voting increase political participation

Nevertheless, it is important to note that the results of this study cannot, and should not, be read as a blanket recommendation of internet voting. In particular, that is because internet voting poses unique challenges for the security of elections which, according to many IT experts , have not yet been satisfactorily resolved.

However, assuming adequate solutions can be found, this study suggests that internet voting can make a valuable contribution to the functioning of democracy by making sure that votes are counted as intended. This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of Democratic Audit.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Email Address. WordPress Theme by Solostream. Should the UK lower the voting age to 16? How internet voting could help to make more votes count. Posted in: Elections and electoral systems. Subscribe If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it. Comments are closed. Democratic Dashboard. Subscribe to Blog via Email Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

My Tweets. Like us on Facebook. How undemocratic is the House of Lords? Is citizen participation actually good for democracy? Additional funding is provided by the London School of Economics. Increased turnout was observed following the introduction of online voting in the Arizona Democratic primary elections in the United States, in a budget referendum in a Brazilian state , and in Estonian local elections for the period — Indeed, some Estonian e-voters reported in post-election surveys that they would not have, or probably would not have, voted in the absence of online voting, ranging from a high of However, the introduction of online voting resulted in no significant impact on turnout for Norwegian local elections in and Swiss federal referendums from to At the same time, understanding the influence of online voting on turnout in light of broader political trends is no easy task.

Regardless of the impact on turnout among the wider population, the more important question is whether it has the potential to increase turnout among demographics that are less likely to participate in elections: notably younger voters. Certainly, there appears to be a relatively consistent body of evidence, from both online voting pilots and surveys showing that younger voters are more open in principle to using internet voting solutions. However, whether this openness results in increased turnout amongst younger voters, or whether it is adopted by those who are more likely to vote anyway, is less clear.

Furthermore, the relationship between age, e-democracy, and actual participation is not necessarily straightforward.

A review of 22 studies on internet voting PDF concluded that socioeconomic factors, such as age, gender, income, and education, were relevant to the choice to use online voting—but only to a certain degree.

In fact, there was a far more important predictor: individual affinity to the internet, a characteristic often correlated with—but not analogous to—age. The authors employ detailed data on newspaper circulation within municipalities, as well as survey information on television consumption and time spent on online entertainment. The internet does not appear to crowd-out newspaper consumption, but there is evidence that the internet crowds-out television consumption, with television being the most prominent source of non-local political information in Germany.

Moreover, the authors present evidence that broadband internet access increased the amount of time individuals spent on online entertainment. These findings relate to the year , when social media that allowed for more user interactions began to rise. Another important consideration is the information and mobilization role of interactive applications such as blogs, Twitter, or Facebook. Before the rise of social media, voting for small fringe parties without a chance of winning a significant vote share was one way to make a political statement.

In the social media era, blogging and tweeting can be more effective ways of expressing political opinions on specific topics. But does this affect voter turnout? The main difficulty in identifying effects relates to the rise of mobile internet technologies in the late s.

Their rise makes it more difficult to define specific groups of voters, as they vary in the ways in which they access information online e. However, despite these challenges, one study provides initial evidence that the negative effect on turnout reverses during this phase of the internet in Italy.

The study shows that the political system responded to the demobilizing effects by making use of online platforms to disseminate political information. Data on the territorial expansion of online platforms for political mobilization further show an association with the formation of local, grassroots protest groups, which rely heavily on social media [2].

Interestingly, the negative effect of broadband internet access on voter turnout found in the years before disappeared. A supply-side interpretation of this reversal is that the internet offers the opportunity to disseminate information at low cost, and firms like Twitter or Facebook have introduced new ways of exchanging political information interactively.

The emergence of social media applications thus gave structure to the information dissemination process and helped voters to collect information more efficiently. At the same time, politicians began using the internet to organize their support and to campaign online. Using a combination of social networks, podcasts, and mobile messages, Obama connected directly with young American voters. Alternatively, the demand-side interpretation of this reversal could also be considered.

Voters needed time to learn how to use the new medium for informational purposes. This adaptation phase might be thought of as a process of trial and error that also presents some inefficiencies. But, after a while, voters became more experienced with the new medium and learned how to filter online information.

Overall, it is most likely that the reversal was driven by both supply-side and demand-side effects. Finally, a word of caution about the positive effects of social media applications.

While there is some evidence that social media successfully stimulate interactions between politicians and voters, with positive effects on political participation, social media providers also collect detailed information about users to allow for targeted advertising. What if politicians use this information in election campaigns to target voters that are easy to mobilize?

There seems to be a thin line between desirable benefits of more efficient information dissemination and undesirable possibilities of voter manipulation. The internet is still a relatively new medium and research on its effects is at an early stage.

This contribution has summarized findings on how the introduction of the internet affects voting behavior. It has employed previous experience with other mass media to frame expectations and, as a result, provides a reference point, but also raises the question of comparability. For example, established media have begun using the internet as a complementary channel to disseminate their content online, via online newspapers, online radio, or live-streaming of television broadcasts.

In this respect, the rise of the internet may be different from historic experiences with respect to the rise of radio or television. Most consumers nowadays use various media online and offline as sources of information, and this development has been intensified by social media applications. A second limitation relates to the lack of studies that look at the effect of social media applications on voting behavior and more generally at the dissemination of political information.

One reason for this lack of research relates to the difficulties finding exogenous variation in access to information after the rise of mobile internet technologies for estimating causal effects. A final limitation relates to the lack of reliable evidence on the effect of the internet on journalism, particularly on the quality of information provided by journalists. Newspapers are facing drastic reductions in their income from advertising, which raises the question of how they save costs.

Do cost savings affect the quality of articles and news stories? And does increased competition for the speed of information dissemination contradict the idea of thorough journalistic investigation? So far, there is no answer. Future research is needed to address this limitation. Evidence from the introduction phase of the internet suggests that there were no effects on party votes but a negative effect on turnout. It seems that the internet crowded-out politically relevant information during this early phase.

However, this changed with the rise of social media. Applications such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, as well as user-generated content websites or blogs, provide new ways of disseminating political information.

These new dissemination channels have multiple benefits. Politicians can use them to mobilize voters, but they can also use online platforms to interact with voters and gain credence for large-scale projects such as labor market reforms.

Beyond that, traditional media firms use new web applications to disseminate information, and the supply of information is further complemented by the possibility to follow expert blogs or tweets, for example those written by well-known academics who comment critically on labor market policies.

The bottom line of the available evidence is that concerns that the internet crowds-out other media at the expense of information quality are justified, but likely exaggerated. Altogether, this holds some policy implications. Like other innovations, the internet gives rise to new business models that bear risks as well as opportunities. On the positive side, the internet holds the potential to satisfy an increasingly diversified demand for information, as long as there is media competition online.

Currently, there are regulatory initiatives to address this concern. However, too much regulation can prevent innovative activities, thus making it undesirable. Moreover, internet companies are highly dynamic, which creates a constant need for new or updated regulations.