Logo des Repositoriums

P347: E-Vote-ID 2023 - Eight International Joint Conference on Electronic Voting

https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/45430
Auflistung nach:

Auflistung P347: E-Vote-ID 2023 - Eight International Joint Conference on Electronic Voting nach Autor:in "Barrat Esteve, Jordi"

1 - 2 von 2
  • Textdokument
    E-Vote-ID 2023: Eight International Joint Conference on Electronic Voting
    (E-Vote-ID 2023, 2023) Pointcheval, David; Haenni, Rolf; Kořánová, Ilona Starý; Aranha, Diego F.; Battagliola, Michele; Roy, Lawrence; Bitussi, M.; Longo, R.; Marino, F. Antonio; Morelli, U.; Sharif, A.; Spadafora, C.; Tomasi, A.; Erb, Yannick; Duenas-Cid, David; Volkamer, Melanie; Serrano Iova, Radu Antonio; Duenas-Cid, David; Loeber, Leontine; Martin-Rozumiłowicz, Beata; Macias, Ryan; Rodríguez-Pérez, Adrià; Costa, Núria; Finogina, Tamara; Esseiva, Olivier; Høgåsen, Audhild; Monnat, Xavier; Cortier, Véronique; Gaudry, Pierrick; Glondu, Stéphane; Ruhault, Sylvain; Hilt, Tobias; Sein, Kati; Mällo, Tanel; Willemson, Jan; Hilt, Tobias; Kulyk, Oksana; Glazer, Amanda K.; Spertus, Jacob V.; Stark, Philip B.; Spycher, Oliver; Barrat Esteve, Jordi
  • Textdokument
    Setting international standards on digital election technologies
    (E-Vote-ID 2023, 2023) Rodríguez-Pérez, Adrià; Barrat Esteve, Jordi
    In recent years, there has been a surge of international standards on digital election technologies: recommendations, guidelines, compendiums, etc. Whereas the legal character of some of these instruments may be put into question, there is no doubt that they prescribe certain good or ideal behaviour that electoral stakeholders should follow when digital technologies are introduced in electoral processes. This paper aims at taking stock of the development of these standards, assessing their degree of legalization, and mapping the stakeholders behind these standard-setting efforts. With this goal in mind, up to 37 international standards on digital election technologies are first identified. These standards deal with issues ranging from broader concerns about the introduction of digital technologies in elections and its compliance with international obligations to the observation and procurement of digital election technologies, as well as with cybersecurity and data protection issues. We are able to demonstrate that although these standards are (still) far from creating an international regime on digital election technologies, they do share many things in common: low levels of obligation and delegation, but high levels of precision that help complement actual hard-law instruments in the electoral field. Second, the paper discusses if the development of these standards can be framed in the context of the Governance Triangle and/or the institution of multi-stakeholderism. Far from what is seen in other areas of global and Internet governance, cooperation between different types of international actors is currently limited: most of the standards being either developed by States, intergovernmental organisations (IGOs), or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) independently.