Impact of election assistance (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report)

Abstract

Query

Please summarise the number, type and headline findings from any impact evaluations completed in the last 10 years on election assistance (programme specific or broader). Restrict evaluations to those that have used rigorous evaluation processes, summarise impact evidence and not lessons learned, and try to identify planned evaluations as well as existing evaluations.

Key findings

There is a large body of evaluation literature relating to election assistance and it is difficult to accurately quantify the number of studies available. This report identifies a sample of impact evaluations undertaken in the last 10 years that apply a rigorous methodology. ‘Rigour’ is taken here to mean any approach that uses systematic, transparent and empirical research to investigate the impacts of an intervention. This includes a range of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods designs.

Evaluations undertaken by, or for, bilateral and multilateral donors have primarily used rigorous qualitative or mixed methods designs. A smaller number of evaluations of electoral interventions have applied an experimental or quasi-experimental methodology, some of them randomised-control trials. Impacts demonstrated in both cases are summarised.

Citation

Rao, S. Impact of election assistance (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report). Governance and Social Development Resource Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK (2013) 11 pp.

Impact of election assistance (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report)

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.