Biometric Elections in Poor Countries: Wasteful or a Worthwhile Investment?

Elections have emerged as a leading area for the application of biometric technology in developing countries, despite its high costs and uncertainty over its effectiveness. Why then do countries pursue such programs, often with the support of donors? The paper considers the costs and benefits of technology, where the latter involves its potential to reduce the probability of seriously disputed elections that escalate into violence. Based on the limited data available, it finds that a reduction in the probability of postelection violence by only a few percentage points could offset the cost of the technology. However, this is far from assured; we argue that biometric technology can only contribute to less disputed and less violent elections in particular settings, those where democracy is not yet well institutionalized but where political parties value the legitimacy conferred by elections that are sufficiently credible for their results to be accepted. One priority is therefore to screen potential cases carefully, before investing in costly programs that have a low probability of success. Another step toward using technology more effectively to underpin sustainable elections would be to build on voter registration drives to strengthen permanent identification assets such as civil registration and national ID programs that can serve as the basis for the voter roll.