This user does not wish to be contacted by the media at this time.
Inken Borzyskowski, Ph.D.
i.Borzyskowski@fsu.edu
Florida State University
About Me:
Inken von Borzyskowski is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Florida State University. Her research focuses on the domestic politics of international relations with an emphasis on international organizations and their effect on domestic conflict and elections. Specifically, her research falls into three areas: international democracy assistance; the causes and consequences of election violence; and international organizations’ membership politics (withdrawals and suspensions). In her book, she develops and test a theory of how international organizations can influence election violence by changing election credibility. Her research is published or forthcoming in International Studies Quarterly, British Journal of Political Science, Review of International Organizations, and Cornell University Press.She received her Ph.D. in International Relations, Methodology, and Comparative Politics at UW-Madison in May 2014.
Research Interests
Comparative Democratization
Peacekeeping
Elections, Election Administration, and Voting Behavior
Conflict Processes & War
Foreign Aid
International Law & Organization
Political Violence
International Organizations
International Democracy Promotion
Election Violence
Technical Election Assistance
Election Observation
United Nations
Peacebuilding
Election Integrity
Election Management
Election Manipulation
IO Membership Withdrawal
IO Membership Suspension
Publications:
Journal Articles:
Research on international election observation shows that observation reduces fraud, encourages participation, and boosts confidence in the election. However, this conventional account misses the negative, violence-inducing potential of observer criticism. This is the first study examining how observer criticism influences post-election violence. Democracy depends on the loser’s consent, and the willingness of election losers to be governed by the winners can be influenced by observer criticism. When reputable observers criticize the credibility of an election, they can encourage losers to challenge the result. Observer criticism strengthens the electoral loser by legitimizing a challenge and serving as a focal point for mobilization. Using data on post-election violence in thirty-eight countries in sub-Saharan Africa since 1990, I show that internationally condemned elections are more likely to turn violent than not-condemned elections. These results are robust to various control variables (including observer presence and election fraud) and accounting for potential selection, spuriousness, endogeneity, and omitted variables.
Why are some developing countries less open to technical election assistance than to election observation? My argument about who seeks and receives technical election assistance is two-fold, taking into account the incentives of recipients and providers. On the recipient side, governments are less likely to request technical assistance when the political costs are high (autocracy) or the benefits low (strong electoral institutions). On the provider side, international organizations are less likely to provide such technical assistance when the government appears to lack political will for reform and full project implementation is unlikely. Statistical analyses of global data on technical election assistance by the United Nations covering 130 countries from 1990 to 2003 support this argument about political cost-benefit calculations in considering technical assistance. Case examples from Guyana, Indonesia, Haiti, and Venezuela illustrate some of these dynamics. My findings suggest that seemingly complementary international interventions (observation and technical support) can create different incentives for domestic and international actors. This helps explain why some countries tend to agree more often to election observation than to technical election assistance.
Books Written:
The key to the impact of international election support is credibility; credible elections are less likely to turn violent. So argues Inken von Borzyskowski in The Credibility Challenge, in which she provides an explanation of why and when election support can increase or reduce violence. Von Borzyskowski answers four major questions: Under what circumstances can election support influence election violence? How can election support shape the incentives of domestic actors to engage in or abstain from violence? Does support help reduce violence or increase it? And, which type of support—observation or technical assistance—is better in each instance? The Credibility Challenge pulls broad quantitative evidence and qualitative observations from Guyana, Liberia, Kenya, Sierra Leone, and Bangladesh to respond to these questions. Von Borzyskowski finds that international democracy aid matters for election credibility and violence; outside observers can exacerbate postelection violence if they cast doubt on election credibility; and technical assistance helps build electoral institutions, improves election credibility, and reduces violence. Her results advance research and policy on peacebuilding and democracy promotion in new and surprising ways