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 20 participants (6 men and 14 women) was held during 24-27 August, in Kutaisi, 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 (representaives 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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 found several key aspects of the workshop particularly valuable and engaging:

• Electoral Systems Design and Criteria: Detailed exploration of evaluation criteria such as fairness, inclusivity, and stability helped participants understand electoral system design and its impact on outcomes.
• Analysis of Electoral Systems: Discussions on specific systems (e.g., proportional representation, mixed systems) and seat distribution formulas were highlighted as practical and impactful.
• Interactive and Practical Exercises: Practical exercises, group work, and games deepened understanding and made the learning process more dynamic.
• Theoretical and Practical Balance: A balanced approach of theory, practical exercises, and real-world examples helped participants grasp complex concepts effectively.
• Reflective Analysis and Summarization: Reflecting on content, summarizing key takeaways, and comparing systems allowed for deeper engagement.
• Professionalism and Environment: The professionalism of trainers and the inclusion of facilitators from the EMB enhanced the learning environment.

Participants provided overwhelmingly positive feedback, highlighting both the content and conduct of the sessions. Here are the key takeaways:

Engagement and Satisfaction: Many participants expressed complete satisfaction with the workshop, describing it as “super,” “well-planned,” and “perfectly organized.” The interactive format, which balanced theoretical and practical components, kept participants engaged and eager to learn more.

Requests for More Training: A recurring recommendation was to offer more frequent BRIDGE workshops, not only on electoral systems but also on related topics, including electoral technologies, cybersecurity, and electotal dispute resolution. Participants also showed interest in facilitator training to help build capacity in delivering similar workshops.

Content and Duration: While participants found the content rich and relevant, some felt that the volume of information was challenging to absorb in just four days. A suggestion was made to extend the training over a full week to allow more time for reflection and assimilation of the material.

Facilitators and Delivery: The professionalism and expertise of the trainers were widely praised. Participants appreciated the comfortable and inclusive environment created by the facilitators, which encouraged active participation and open discussion.

Overall, the workshop was considered highly valuable, with participants expressing enthusiasm for future training opportunities, particularly those that continue to build on the strong foundation of practical exercises and expert facilitation. In conclusion, the workshop’s combination of theoretical knowledge, practical exercises, and engaging discussions on specific systems made it highly valuable for participants.

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.