Electoral competitiveness in a digital age
Literature posits that digital technologies play a key role in providing citizens with opportunities to engage with their local governments. Through the usage of for example social media, citizens are able to voice their concerns and partake in decision making processes. This subsequently increases citizen participation and engagement. Akhtar et al. (2019) discuss how these digital technologies offer real-time engagement between citizens and local governments, thereby enabling communication and feedback mechanisms. Digital technologies, therefore, contribute to smart local government. Additionally, the streamlining of service delivery processes, e.g. submitting service delivery requests and other e-government initiatives, helps reduce administrative burden while increasing local government operational efficiency (Mvuyana, Ndebele and Zondo, 2024). The automation and efficiency enabled through the use of smart infrastructure contribute to better service delivery, thereby increasing the likelihood of local government re-election. Subsequently, the vast amount of data gathered through these e-government initiatives has the potential to inform evidence-based decisions and policy. These further aid transparency and drive accountability through the regular audit systems that analyse data gathered. Digital technologies therefore have a potential for data collection, analysis and monitoring essential for tracking processes, informing decisions and identifying areas of improvement (Omujo et al., 2019) within the locality. Although the digital age promises snippets of communication, accountability, transformation, transparency, informed decision making and, inclusion, there are still challenges to address.
Contradictions of digital technologies
Scholarship argues that electoral participation and political competition have an effect on government efficiency (Ariza Marin, Goda and Tabares Pozos, 2021). Electoral competition forms an integral part of democracy. Competitive elections grant opposition parties the opportunity to replace incumbent parties; a sight often celebrated as an exercise of democracy and good governance. Such instances are fuelled by party performance within local governance. In light of digital governance, e-governance platforms, although offering problem-solving and citizen participation opportunities, have also become sites of contestation. Performance barometer dashboards have obscured political contestation, reducing local elections to managerial contests. Political party ideologies rarely matter anymore; what matters is the speed and efficiency of problem-solving. The focus on statistics and local government comparisons has become more important than before. Statistics have become an “end that states aspire to achieve” (Gupta, 2012: 158), but do statistics tell the full story? Although gathering data is a bureaucratic core activity central to informing welfare programs, the actual use of the statistics gathered, and their accuracy are still questionable. Within the South African context, a blinded focus on performance dashboards may seemingly juxtapose and inform political party efficiency and local election voter behaviour; however, there are narratives rendered invisible – political party manifestos and ideologies regarding issues of recognition and redistribution.
Furthermore, local governments become sites for boosting political party efficiency; however, a blinded focus on their performance alone could obscure policy formulation and impacts in the long run. Is there any redemption?
Political campaigns serve as marketing exercises for most political actors. Electoral periods often prompt communication strategies for reaching potential voters and encouraging support. In the digital era, many political parties have sought to incorporate social media as part of their marketing communication strategy. Social media has become a site where identities are policed, challenged and forged. Within the political sphere, public opinion is constantly shaped by social media influencers. Although important for mobilizing voter participation particularly the youth, there is still a digital divide (Ibeanu, 2022). In as much as they have contributed to citizen participation, “they have also excluded citizens by creating a series of technology divides based on rural-urban, gender and age differences” (ibid: 23). We therefore see the nebulous nexus between electoral competitiveness and digital technologies. Despite digital technology improving electoral participation and amplifying electoral competitiveness and citizen voices, it excludes some voices. Borrowing from Brian Larkin’s understanding of infrastructure as built networks, which in this case facilitate the flow of “ideas and allow for their exchange over space (2013: 328), digital technologies, particularly social media, may serve this purpose. The speed, temporality, targeted populations and vulnerability of ideas all highlight an exercise of dominance. Thinking through the idea of infrastructures, we can link it with the contemporary concerns over technopolitics. Technological domains, although they were seemingly removed from political institutions in the past, have become integral components of political party behaviour. Additionally, they have sought to organise territories and populations (Nyabola, 2018; Tufekci, 2017). Digital visibility has influenced and dominated local discourse while sidelining grassroots voices. This further perpetuates a reproduction of inequality.
Additionally, although digital infrastructure promises inclusion, there is still a risk of reinforcing existing hierarchies in relation to literacy, visibility and accessibility. Gupta (2012) argues this when discussing the engraved structural violence in bureaucratic systems. Digital technologies as infrastructures for information sometimes hit stumbling blocks in areas where the network is an issue. Rural populations are, in that manner, excluded from the online conversations and subsequently miss out on vital information and rhetoric. Gupta (2012) argues the importance of the written word. In his quest, he analyses the relationship between literacy and empowerment. Although the assumption for the lack of, for example, submitted complaints from poor societies may be due to illiteracy, Gupta (2012) argues that there is rather a lack of cultural and political capital. Without political connections, economic capital or knowledge of what is happening in the state, one would be less likely to engage with these issues. Putting it into the South African context, the cost of data airtime bundles and/or terrible network infrastructure in some areas may disadvantage citizens, thereby sidelining them from ongoing state discourse.
What now?
Digital technologies, although they offer platforms for information exchange, are largely foreign-owned, for example, Meta, Google, X, etc. The use of algorithms prioritizes particular kinds, speeds and spreads of information, shaping norms and areas of focus. This posits visibility being a form of power. In rendering particular information, norms, or voices visible, it may consequently mute or render other sources invisible. Despite the risks aforementioned, digital platforms still offer new ways for resistance, storytelling and potential subaltern visibility. This however, requires:
· Regulation of political visibility – as addressed above, electoral competitiveness is skewed by digital divides fuelled by economic and sometimes infrastructural lack. There is therefore a need for more open-source platforms and network infrastructural development to enable fair participation and engagement of citizens across the state
· Reworking performance dashboard designs – despite offering monitoring systems and potentially showing municipal performance and efficiency, there is a need to rework the smart technology with civil society actors. This would reflect context-sensitive key performance indicators that are relevant to the community’s priorities. Additionally, there is need for a detailed incorporation of qualitative data to enhance the interpretation of statistics which often disembodies and mask realities
· Equitable digital access – performance dashboards, political party information and communication should increasingly be disseminated in various ways, such as radio, posters, online spaces, open-source platforms, etc. Additionally, they should be translated into local languages to accommodate citizens
Electoral competitiveness, although essential to the democratic process, requires constant reworking and reframing. While most politicians have opted to lean on digital technologies for their campaign strategies, digital technology regulation is important. Although digital technologies present opportunities for access, transparency, voice amplification and engagement, ethical considerations are necessary. Where there is promise for development, there is subsequently a risk of reproduction of inequality. It is with this; careful consideration is necessary in ensuring all voices are represented and heard.
Thelma Nyarhi is a Researcher at the Democracy Development Program (DDP) and writes in her own capacity.
References
Akhtar, P., Hui, P. M., & Yunus, F. N. (2019). Digital technologies and good governance: An empirical investigation of e-government adoption in developing countries. Information Technology for Development, 25(1), 133-156.
Ariza Marín, D., Goda, T. and Tabares Pozos, G., 2021. Political competition, electoral participation and local fiscal performance. Development Studies Research, 8(1), pp.24-35.
Gupta, A., 2012. Red Tape: Bureaucracy, Structural Violence and Poverty in India. Durham and London: Duke University Press
Ibeanu, O.O., 2022. Digital technologies and election management in Africa’s democratisation process. Africa Development/Afrique et Développement, 47(2), pp.15-40.
Larkin, B., 2013. The politics and poetics of infrastructure. Annual review of anthropology, 42(2013), pp.327-343.
Mvuyana, B.Y.C., Ndebele, N.C. and Zondi, S., 2024. The Contours of Smart Local Government: A Prologue. The Contours of Digitally Smart Local Government, p.10.
Nyabola, N., 2018. Digital democracy, analogue politics: How the Internet era is transforming politics in Kenya. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Omoju, O. E., Ekenedo, I. M., & Ayeni, B. (2019). Data-driven decision making for effective governance: A systematic literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 563-576.
Tufekci, Z., 2017. Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press.
