Abstract
AbstractDespite being one of the biggest international users of online voting with two decades of use, Canada has tended to use non-verifiable online voting systems. This has prompted concern about the verification of election results and potential impacts on public and administrator confidence in elections and democracy. In the 2022 Ontario municipal elections, however, about 9% of municipalities offered the option of individual verifiability to online voters. This article draws upon the experiences of two local governments of different sizes, resources, capacity, and online voting histories - Ignace and Markham - and their vendors to understand the considerations and challenges that come with the introduction of verifiability mechanisms in local elections. We identify deterrents to implementation and possible solutions to see an increase in uptake and improve the integrity of local elections.
Publisher
Springer Nature Switzerland
Reference43 articles.
1. Acemyan, C.Z., Kortum, P., Byrne, M.D., Wallach, D.S., Schneider, S., Teague, V.: Usability of voter verifiable, end-to-end voting systems: baseline data for Helios, Prêt à Voter, and scantegrity {II}. In: 2014 Electronic Voting Technology Workshop/Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (EVT/WOTE 14) (2014)
2. Ali, S.T., Murray, J.: An overview of end-to-end verifiable voting systems. In: Hao, F., Ryan, P.Y.A. (ed.) Real-World Electronic Voting, pp. 189–234. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group (2016)
3. Benaloh, J., Rivest, R., Ryan, P.Y., Stark, P., Teague, V., Vora, P.: End-to-end verifiability (2014). arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.03778
4. Blais, A.: To vote or not to vote?: The merits and limits of rational choice theory. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh (2000)
5. Bracco, E., Revelli, F.: Concurrent elections and political accountability: evidence from Italian local elections. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 148, 135–149 (2018)