Recent initiatives for increasing participation in UK elections have yet to replace the traditional method of in-person voting at designated polling stations. Recent research has shown that voter turnout can be sensitive to geographical factors relating to the costs of voting, such as distance travelled to the polling station; government policy has stated that accessibility is a key criterion when siting polling stations. With this paper we directly address these important issues by predicting the probability of electoral turnout to parliamentary, local, and European elections when polling stations are resited to optimal and suboptimal locations based on polling district voter density in the London Borough of Brent. The differences in these predicted probabilities show that, for some polling districts, resiting the polling place could improve the probability of turnout by up to five percentage points. These findings lead to some recommendations for future policy relating to the siting of polling places in the UK.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllersMKooremanP, 2009, “More evidence of the effects of voting technology on election outcomes”Public Choice139159170
2.
BlaisA, 2000To Vote or Not to Vote: The Merits and Limits of Rational Choice Theory (University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA)
3.
BlaisAGidengilENevitteN, 2004, “Where does turnout decline come from?”European Journal of Political Research43221236
4.
ClarkeHSandersDStewartMWhiteleyP, 2004Political choice in Britain (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
5.
CurticeJSeydBThomsonK, 2001, “Devolution to the centre: Lessons from London's first mayoral election”, WP 90, Centre for Research into Elections and Social Trends, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, and National Centre for Social Research, London
6.
DowdingK, 2005, “Is it rational to vote? Five types of answers and suggestion”British Journal of Politics and International Relations7442459
7.
DyckJJGimpelJ, 2005, “Distance, turnout, and the convenience of voting”Social Science Quarterly86531548
8.
EdlinAGelmanAKaplanN, 2007, “Voting as a rational choice: Why and how people vote to improve the well-being of others”Rationality and Society19293314
9.
Electoral Commission, London2007aElectronic Voting: May 2007 Electoral Pilot Schemes
10.
Electoral Commission, London2007bHandbook for Polling Station Staff: Supporting Local Government Elections in England and Wales
11.
Electoral Commission, London2007cManaging a Local Government Election in England and Wales: Guidance for Returning Officers, A Good Practice Guidance Manual
12.
Electoral Commission, London2010aThe Completeness and Accuracy of Electoral Registers in Great Britain
13.
Electoral Commission, London2010b2010 UK Parliamentary General Election. Interim Report: Review of Problems at Polling Stations at Close of Poll on 6 May 2010
14.
FairweatherBRogersonS, 2002Implementation of Electronic Voting in the UK: Technical Options ReportLocal Government Association, London
15.
FeddersenTJ, 2004, “Rational choice theory and the paradox of not voting”Journal of Economic Perspectives1899112
16.
FowlerJKamC, 2007, “Beyond the self: Altruism, social identity, and political participation”The Journal of Politics69813827
17.
GimpelJGSchuknechtJE, 2003, “Political participation and the accessibility of the ballot box”Political Geography22471488
18.
GimpelJGDyckJJShawDR, 2006, “Location, knowledge and time pressures in the spatial structure of convenience voting”Electoral Studies253558
GronkePGalanes-RosenbaumEMillerPA, 2007, “Early voting and turnout”Political Science and Politics40639645
21.
HaspelMKnottsG, 2005, “Location, location, location: Precinct placement and the costs of voting”Journal of Politics67560573
22.
HeathATaylorB, 1999, “New sources of abstention?”, in Critical Elections: British Parties and Voters in Long-term Perspective Eds EvansGNorrisP (Sage, London) pp 164180
23.
HuarteMMadarietaMGoirizelaiaIUnzillaJJ, 2008, “An analysis of improvements for voter interfaces in polling station and remote electronic voting systems”, in Visual Information Systems: Web-based Visual Information Search and Management Eds SebilloMVitielloGSchaeferG (Springer, Berlin) pp 291301
24.
NiemiRGGrofmanBCarlucciCHofellerT, 1990, “Measuring compactness and the role of a compactness standard in a test for partisan and racial gerrymandering”Journal of Politics5211551181
25.
OrfordSSchumanA, 2002, “Micro-geography and socialization: New ways of investigating the turnout problem”, in British Elections and Parties Review 12: The 2001 General Election Eds BennieLRailingsCTongeJWebbP (Frank Cass, London) pp 190205
26.
OrfordSRailingsCThrasherMBorisyukG, 2008, “Investigating differences in electoral turnout: The influence of ward-level context on participation in local and parliamentary elections in Britain”Environment and Planning A4012501268
27.
OrfordSRailingsCThrasherMBorisyukG, 2009, “Electoral salience and the costs of voting at national, sub-national and supra-national elections in the UK: A case study of Brent UK”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series34195214
28.
PattieCJohnstonR, 1998, “Voter turnout at the British general election of 1992: Rational choice, social standing or political efficacy?”European Journal of Political Research33263283
29.
PattieCJohnstonR, 2000, “People who talk together vote together: An exploration of contextual effects in Great Britain”Annals of the Association of American Geographers904166
30.
RailingsCThrasherM, 1990, “Turnout in English local election: An aggregate analysis with electoral and contextual data”Electoral Studies97990
31.
RailingsCThrasherM, 2007, “The turnout ‘gap’ and the costs of voting: A comparison of participation at the 2001 general and 2002 local elections in England”Public Choice131333344
32.
RailingsCThrasherMDowneJRidgeMLowryM, 2000Turnout at Local Government Elections: Influences on Levels of Voter Registration and Electoral ParticipationDepartment of Environment, Transport and the Regions, London
33.
RasbashJSteeleFBrownW, 2003, “A user's guide to MLwiN version 21e”, Centre for Multi-level Modelling, Institute of Education, University of London, London
34.
ReifK, 1984, “National electoral cycles and European: Elections 1979 and 1984”Electoral Studies3244255
35.
ReifKSchmittH, 1980, “Nine national second-order elections: A systematic framework for analysis of European elections results”European Journal of Political Research8344
36.
RikerWOrdeshookP, 1968, “A theory of the calculus of voting”American Political Science Review622543
37.
SouthwellPL, 2004, “Five years later: A re-assessment of Oregon's vote by mail electoral process”PS-Political Science and Politics378993
38.
SteinRMVonnahmeG, 2008, “Engaging the unengaged voter: Vote centers and voter turnout”The Journal of Politics70487497
