What can we learn from anti-vote buying research?

View this email in your browser

[link removed]

[link removed]

More evidence, less poverty

[link removed]

Dear John,

Happy Election Day! While many of us head to the ballot box and eagerly await the U.S. election results, we wanted to pop into your inboxes to provide a quick breather from U.S. election coverage.

You may know that IPA has a small portfolio of research on electoral participation

[link removed]

. However, you may not know that, despite being several years old, our study on strategies to combat vote-buying and selling in the Philippines is one of the most frequently visited pages on our website.

Vote-buying, paying people with cash or gifts for their votes, obstructs the democratic process by undermining the political representation of voters and diminishing the availability of public services for underserved populations, yet vote-buying is still common in many countries.

IPA has conducted research on anti-vote buying interventions in Uganda and the Philippines. Both studies suggest effective strategies to combat vote-buying and reduce vote-selling.

Which of these strategies do you think were shown to be successful in allowing people to vote for their preferred candidate?

Asking voters to promise not to sell their votes

[link removed]

Telling voters that they can accept a gift but still vote for their preferred candidate

[link removed]

Both A and B

[link removed]

None of the above

[link removed]

While we wait for our election results at home, we hope this peek into election issues and efforts to resolve them around the world provided you with a moment of fun and learning.

Sincerely,

IPA Team

Sent to [email protected] by Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA)

Innovations for Poverty Action

1701 Rhode Island Ave NW, 3rd Floor

Washington, DC 20036

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Manage Your Email Preferences

[link removed]

| Forward This Email