印度大選開跑 1/4選民是文盲
摘錄自：天下雜誌 經濟學人電子報 2014/4/11
2014-04-09 Web
only 作者：經濟學人
 |
| 圖片來源：flickr.com/photos/aljazeeraenglish/3461528641 |
印度於4月7日進行普選，合格選民近8.15億人，其中約四分之一是文盲，得靠手掌、蓮花、大象等政黨代表標誌作出選擇。阿富汗、巴西、伊拉克、馬拉威、莫三比克等今年舉行選舉的部分國家，選民中亦有相當比例的文盲；與識字者相比，文盲前往投票的機會較低，就算去有投票，投出無效票的機會也比較高。窮人和少數族群的文盲比例較高，例如歐洲國家的羅姆人（吉普賽人）文盲率約為5～35％。而在非洲、中東與大部分亞洲，女性的文盲比例遠高於男性。
文盲也比較有可能賣票，或是在欺騙、威脅之下投給騙子或惡棍。專家表示，東歐和中歐的政治人物有時會付錢給高利貸放款者，收買欠錢羅姆人的選票。2011的論文發現，在文盲率較高的區域，印度政黨比較有機會推派面臨犯罪指控的參選人，而這類參選人會壓低投票率；研究者認為，這是因為問題政治人物比較喜歡在易於威脅對手支持者的地方參選。
簡化投票程序，是確保文盲得以在獲得充分資訊的情況下，投出有效票的第一步。印度率先在1952年試驗標誌投票，許多非洲國家則會在選票上印出參選人的姓名和照片。電子投票機也有幫助，但只有不丹、巴西、法國、印度和委內瑞拉全國性採用；巴西採用電子投票機之後，已經讓廢票率從23％降至11％。
選民教育活動同樣重要，例如，肯亞就有自動化的投票協助專線。面對面的方式則包括圖像式課程、街頭劇場與選舉日模擬；巴基斯坦在女性就學率低於20%的鄉村進行登門宣傳，不但增加了女性的投票率，也減少了女性與侶伴投給同一位候選人的機會。但專家指出，大多數地區的選民教育仍舊不足。
研究顯示，在巴西，使用投票機的地區，醫療支出高於尚未使用的地區。研究者的結論是，投票機讓窮人和文盲的選票更有機會成為有效票，也讓政治人物更在乎他們關心的事。單只是讓那些無法閱讀的人，可以在獲得足夠資訊的情況下投票，似乎就能改善選舉的結果。（黃維德編譯）
©The Economist
Newspaper Limited 2014
The Economist
Illiterate voters
Making their
mark
By The Economist
From The Economist
Published: April 09, 2014
Teaching those who
cannot read how to vote makes for cleaner, fairer elections.
Apr 5th 2014 |
MUMBAI | From the print edition
SUVARNA PADEKAR
cannot read. "It hurts," she says, but she manages to get by as a
cook in Mumbai. Each morning her employers let her know what food to prepare by
leaving pictures of vegetables, rice and so on stuck to the fridge. Soon Mrs
Padekar will pick her favourite from similar images—at the voting booth. Almost
815m people will be eligible to vote in India's general elections, which start
on April 7th (see article). About a quarter are illiterate and will identify
their choices by party symbols such as a hand, lotus, or elephant.
Illiterates are a
big share of the electorate in several other countries going to the polls this
year, including Afghanistan (on April 5th), Brazil, Iraq, Malawi and
Mozambique. Compared with their compatriots who can read, they will be less
likely to cast a vote at all, and more likely to spoil their vote if they do.
Illiteracy rates are higher among marginalised ethnic minorities and the poor:
5-35% for Roma (gypsies) in European countries, for example. Far more women
than men are illiterate in Africa, much of Asia and the Middle East.
Illiterates are
also more likely to be persuaded to sell their votes, or tricked or intimidated
into voting for crooks and thugs. Mrs Padekar admits to voting for a generous
candidate in the most recent local elections: she and her friends got a taxi
ride to the polling station, cash, saris, prayer utensils and a free trip to a
famous temple. ("Ask god to elect me," he told them.) Politicians in
eastern and central Europe sometimes pay loan sharks to buy the votes of Roma
who owe them money, says Zeljko Jovanovic of Open Society Foundations, a group
that campaigns for Roma inclusion. A 2011 paper by Toke Aidt, Miriam Golden,
and Devesh Tiwari found that India's political parties are more likely to field
candidates who face criminal allegations in districts where illiteracy rates
are higher, and such candidates depress turnout. This they attribute to shady
politicians preferring to stand where it is easier to intimidate opponents'
supporters away from voting.
Simplifying voting
procedures is the first step to ensuring that illiterates can cast informed and
valid votes. India pioneered voting with symbols in 1952. (New parties must now
choose from an unappealing list of still-available symbols, including the toothbrush
and the nail-clipper.) Many African countries put photos as well as names on
the ballot paper; Gambians vote by dropping marbles in drums blazoned with
candidates' faces. The marble strikes a bell inside to ensure only one vote is
cast; to avoid confusion, bicycles are banned near to polling stations on
election day.
Electronic voting
machines can help, but only Bhutan, Brazil, France, India and Venezuela use
them nationwide. Until the late 1990s Brazilian voters had to write their
candidate's name or electoral number on the ballot. Nowadays, they need only
type a candidate's number on a voting machine the size of a cash register, and
confirm their choice after seeing a photograph. The machines' introduction cut
the share of spoilt votes from 23% to 11%.
Voter-education
campaigns matter, too. Kenya has an automated helpline explaining how to vote.
Face-to-face methods include lessons using picture guides, street theatre and
election-day simulations. A door-to-door campaign in a rural area of Pakistan
where less than 20% of women had been to school saw more women voting and fewer
picking the same candidates as their male relatives. But voter education is
weak in most places, says David Carroll of the Carter Centre in Atlanta, which
monitors elections worldwide.
Thomas Fujiwara of
Princeton University used the phased introduction of voting machines in Brazil
to study their effects on health-care spending: regions where they were being
used spent more than those yet to make the switch. He concluded that by making
the votes of poor, illiterate voters more likely to count, the machines
encouraged politicians to cater to their concerns. Screening debates between
candidates at polling stations in Sierra Leone boosted the showing of
better-qualified politicians. In Benin, where campaign rallies are all about
distributing cash and promises of patronage, holding town-hall meetings instead
cut clientelism among voters. The very steps that elicit informed votes from
those who cannot read seem to make for better election outcomes all around.
©The Economist
Newspaper Limited 2014
沒有留言:
張貼留言