Electoral Systems modular workshop for Media and CSOs

IFES Georgia through USAID assistance implemented a 3,5 day Electoral Systems modular workshop for electoral stakeholders. The workshop was led by two IFES facilitators – Natia Kashakashvili, David Ghonghadze and two Central Election Commission of Georgia facilitators – Giorgi Sharabidze and Natia Ioseliani. The workshop, that was attended by 19 participants (6 men and 13 women) was held during 2-5 September, in Tbilisi, Georgia.

The objective of the BRIDGE modular workshop on Electoral Systems was to provide participants with a comprehensive understanding of the different electoral systems used around the world. The workshop aimed to equip participants (representatives of CSOs and the Media) with the knowledge and analytical skills needed to evaluate electoral systems and their impact on democratic processes. The key objectives included:

1. Overview of Electoral Systems:

• Present a detailed overview of various electoral systems used globally, including plural-majoritarian, proportional, mixed systems, and others.
• Explore the key features, mechanisms, and variations of each system.

2. Discussion of Features, Advantages, and Disadvantages:

• Facilitate an in-depth discussion on the main features of each electoral system.
• Identify and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each system, considering factors such as representation, party diversity, and government stability.

3. Evaluation of Electoral Systems Against Criteria:

• Introduce specific criteria for evaluating electoral systems, such as legitimacy, simplicity, inclusiveness, effectiveness in producing stable governments, and the ability to reflect diverse political views.
• Guide participants in using these criteria to critically assess different electoral systems.

4. Comparison and Analysis of Election Results:

• Compare and analyze the outcomes of elections conducted under different electoral systems, using real examples.
• Highlight how different systems can lead to varying results in terms of favoring different party representation and overall electoral fairness.

5. Projection of Parliamentary Election Trends with Proportional Representation:

• Present potential trends and outcomes of parliamentary elections conducted under a List Proportional Representation system.
• Explore how PR systems can affect party competition, coalition-building, and the representation of minority groups in parliament.

Participants identified several aspects of the BRIDGE modular workshop on Electoral Systems as particularly valuable and engaging:

• Core Principles of Electoral Systems: Participants appreciated the in-depth exploration of the fundamental principles and priorities of electoral systems, including design criteria, the representative principle, and the essence of different models. The discussions on ensuring representation in electoral systems were considered highly informative.
• Electoral Systems and Seat distribution formulas: Specific electoral systems, such as Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP), were of particular interest. Participants found the comparisons of systems, including their advantages and disadvantages, as well as the formulas for seat distribution, to be both practical and enlightening.
• Criteria and System Design: The process of designing electoral systems based on various criteria, and sorting systems according to these criteria, was highlighted as a crucial and engaging part of the workshop. Exercises that involved evaluating systems based on set criteria helped participants grasp the complexities of electoral system design.
• Interactive and Practical Exercises: The hands-on nature of the workshop was highly valued. Exercises, such as identifying the best system and recounting votes, allowed participants to apply theoretical concepts in a practical context. The focus on practical exercises made the learning process dynamic and ensured active participant involvement.
• Comparative Analysis: The comparison of different electoral systems, including exploring their pros and cons in relation to various criteria, was particularly engaging. Participants noted that revisiting and rethinking these systems with greater knowledge deepened their understanding.

Participants provided enthusiastic feedback on the workshop, highlighting several aspects:

1. Content and Delivery: The workshop was praised for being well-organized, engaging, and easy to understand. Participants found the practical examples especially helpful in making complex concepts more accessible. The balance between theory and practice was well-received, and many felt that the training exceeded their expectations.

2. Interactive and Inclusive Environment: The interactive nature of the training, with an emphasis on group involvement and non-stressful learning, was noted as a key strength. The inclusion of female participants and the overall group dynamics contributed to a positive and inclusive atmosphere.

3. Trainer Expertise: The professionalism and high level of knowledge displayed by the trainers were consistently highlighted. Participants appreciated the trainers’ ability to create a welcoming environment while delivering complex material in an understandable way.

4. Logistics and Suggestions: A few recommendations were made for improvement:

  – Extending coffee breaks for better performance during sessions.

  – Moving the mathematical content to earlier in the day for better focus.

  – Managing the volume of reading material to avoid participant fatigue.

5. Desire for Continued Learning: Many participants expressed a strong interest in further training opportunities. The workshop sparked a desire to deepen their knowledge and apply what they had learned to future work, especially in electoral advocacy and system improvement.

Overall, the workshop’s focus on both the theoretical and practical aspects of electoral systems, coupled with interactive exercises, provided participants with a comprehensive and engaging learning experience. The workshop was highly valued for its quality content, interactive approach, and effective delivery, with participants eager for future training opportunities.

By the end of the workshop, participants were better equipped to understand the complexities of electoral systems and their influence on democratic governance. They also gained practical insights into how electoral system design can impact election outcomes and broader political dynamics. At the end of the workshop all participants were awarded certificates of completion.

The successful co-facilitation of the workshop resulted in David Ghonghadze’s accreditation as a workshop-level facilitator.