IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v63y2009i04p765-787_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

D-Minus Elections: The Politics and Norms of International Election Observation

Author

Listed:
  • Kelley, Judith

Abstract

As international election monitors have grown active worldwide, their announcements have gained influence. Sometimes, however, they endorse highly flawed elections. Because their leverage rests largely on their credibility, this is puzzling. Understanding the behavior of election monitors is important because they help the international community to evaluate the legitimacy of governments and because their assessments inform the data used by scholars to study democracy. Furthermore, election monitors are also particularly instructive to study because the variety of both intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations that observe elections makes it possible to compare them across many countries and political contexts. This study uses a new dataset of 591 international election-monitoring missions. It shows that despite their official mandate to focus on election norms, monitors do not only consider the elections' quality; their assessments also reflect the interests of their member states or donors as well as other tangential organizational norms. Thus, even when accounting as best as possible for the nature and level of irregularities in an election, monitors' concerns about democracy promotion, violent instability, and organizational politics and preferences are associated with election endorsement. The study also reveals differences in the behavior of intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations and explains why neither can pursue their core objectives single-mindedly.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelley, Judith, 2009. "D-Minus Elections: The Politics and Norms of International Election Observation," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(4), pages 765-787, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:63:y:2009:i:04:p:765-787_99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818309990117/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sunn Bush, Sarah & Cottiero, Christina & Prather, Lauren, 2024. "Zombies Ahead: Explaining the Rise of Low-Quality Election Monitoring," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt2fc2d3pr, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    2. Robert O. Keohane & Michael Oppenheimer, 2016. "Paris: Beyond the Climate Dead End through Pledge and Review?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 142-151.
    3. Morrison, Kelly & Savun, Burcu & Donno, Daniela & Davutoglu, Perisa, 2023. "Competing Verdicts: Multiple Election Monitors and Post-Election Contention," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt3kc4f57j, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    4. Daniel L. Nielson & Susan D. Hyde & Judith Kelley, 2019. "The elusive sources of legitimacy beliefs: Civil society views of international election observers," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 685-715, December.
    5. Kristine Höglund & Anna K. Jarstad, 2011. "Toward Electoral Security: Experiences from KwaZulu-Natal," Africa Spectrum, Institute of African Affairs, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 46(1), pages 33-59.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:63:y:2009:i:04:p:765-787_99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.