What Changes to the Institution of Elections are Acceptable During a Pandemic? A Review of the 2020–2021 Studies

Abstract

This article presents a review of research on the transformation of the institution of elections during the COVID‑19 pandemic. The review covers the academic and expert literature from 2020–2021. The main research centers studying the impact of a pandemic on the electoral process are characterized. The main directions, the most important arguments, and the results of the debate on the permissibility of postponement of elections during a pandemic are identified. It was found that during 2020, the majority of researchers justified the expediency of postponing the election before the alternative of distorting the procedures of the election campaign. There is an exceptionally high degree of solidarity among researchers that decisions about elections during a pandemic must be made on the basis of broad political consensus. Consideration is given to the introduction and dissemination of new voting procedures during a pandemic. Differences between American and European experts were found in their attitudes toward the prospects and acceptability of the proliferation of alternative voting procedures. In the period under review, no stable trends in the understanding and interpretation of the electoral changes that have taken place have emerged. Existing methodological attitudes, in particular the unpopularity of traditional institutionalism, prevent a comprehensive study of the transformation of electoral institutions in modern science. For the first time in several decades of consideration of electoral institutions in English-­language science, the dominance of liberal ideological values has been cut short. At the current stage of development of ideas about the organization of elections, values and legal guidelines give way to a pragmatic approach. The pandemic may halt the further development of electoral standards.