<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Copied from "How blockchain technology could change our lives" at <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2017/581948/EPRS_IDA(2017)581948_EN.pdf">http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2017/581948/EPRS_IDA(2017)581948_EN.pdf</a>. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>E-voting: revolutionizing the electoral system? <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Despite the digitalization of several important aspects of modern life, elections are still conducted largely offline, on paper. Since the turn of the century, e-voting has been considered a promising and, perhaps, inevitable development that could speed up, simplify and reduce the cost of elections. It has been seen as a potential means of increasing engagement and turnout, and even restoring links between citizens and political institutions, claims that should be read with some skepticism, e-voting could take many forms: using the internet or a dedicated, isolated network; requiring voters to attend a polling station or allowing unsupervised voting; using existing devices, such as mobile phones and laptops, or requiring specialist equipment. Now there is a further choice to be made: to continue trusting central authorities to manage elections or to use blockchain technology to distribute an open voting record amongst the citizens. Many experts agree that e-voting for national elections would require revolutionary developments in security systems. However, there are many other kinds of regional and organizational election that could be digitized more simply through the use of blockchain, making it simpler to involve more people in taking important decisions, adopting long-term strategies, making investments and selecting people for a wide range of positions. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>How blockchain technology could be used for e-voting <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>The blockchain is a means of logging and verifying records that is transparent and distributed among users. Usually, votes are recorded, managed, counted and checked by a central authority. Blockchain-enabled e-voting (BEV) would empower voters to do these tasks themselves by allowing them to hold a copy of the voting record. The historic record cannot be changed, because other voters would see that the record differs from theirs. An illegitimate vote cannot be added, because other voters would be able to see that it is not compatible with the rules (perhaps because it was already counted or is not associated with a valid voter record). BEV would shift power and trust away from central actors, such as electoral authorities, and foster the development of tech-enabled community consensus. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>One way of developing BEV systems is to create a new, bespoke system, designed to reflect the specific characteristics of the election and electorate. A second approach that may be cheaper and easier is to 'piggyback' a more established blockchain, such as Bitcoin. Given that the security of a blockchain ledger relies upon the breadth of its user base, this approach may also be more secure for minor organizational elections with a small number of voters and limited resources to develop a bespoke system. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>The strongest potential for BEV is in organizational contexts. Indeed, they have already been used for the internal elections of political parties in Denmark and shareholder votes in Estonia. Taking the concept a step further, BEV could be combined with smart contracts, to automatically take action under certain agreed conditions. Here, for example, election results could trigger the automatic implementation of manifesto promises, investment choices or other organizational decisions. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Many analysts have considered blockchain in a supporting role for deeper transformations, for instance in discussions of virtual administrations, 'techno-democratic systems' and the more distant possibility of implementing BEV for national elections. Ambitious suggestions have raised the possibility of using blockchain to implement 'liquid' democracy, combining direct democracy (whereby citizens vote regularly on specific policy decisions) with a delegate system (whereby citizens can either vote on these specific issues themselves or assign their votes to any other citizen – be they a politician, journalist, scientist or trusted friend – and withdraw or reassign this delegation at any time). <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>How blockchain technology could change our lives <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Potential impacts and developments <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Considering minor elections and organizational decision-making, BEV could help deliver a more participatory and bottom-up social structure by offering a relatively cheap and secure e-voting system. In the context of more ambitious suggestions for national elections, the stakes are much higher and the situation is more delicate. Critics have questioned the level of anonymity and accessibility offered by BEV, and raised the problem of coercion. However, while BEV may offer several advantages over paper and other e-voting systems, many of these concerns apply equally to traditional paper systems. Coercion is a threat for any voting system that offers remote participation (e.g. postal votes). For both BEV and paper elections, the use of private polling booths is the only guarantee against this. Accessibility to all voters is another key concern in all elections. Depending upon the interface, BEV might be considered too complicated for some voters, especially if the system is fully decentralized with the option to access data and check that the correct procedures have been followed. Anonymity is often considered a crucial element of democratic participation, although even some national elections are not fully anonymous. The UK, for instance, has a 'pseudonymous' paper voting system where a code links each ballot paper with a personal entry on the electoral registry. There, voters have no choice but to trust the electoral authorities to protect their anonymity. While it would not be easy to discover how individuals voted, it does remain a possibility. BEV is also pseudonymous, so it may sometimes be possible to discover how an individual voted. Work is in progress on a technical response to this issue in developing BEV systems that offer full anonymity. Another approach could be to trust a central authority to distribute pseudonyms for use in a BEV and to keep them secret, just as they do now in the UK's paper voting system. This would introduce a degree of centralization into the system which may well be considered acceptable in the context of national elections. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Another key question is how to ensure widespread trust in the security and legitimacy of the system. As with paper-based elections, it is not enough for the result to be fair and valid. The whole electorate, even if they are disappointed with the result, must accept that the process was legitimate and reliable. As such, beyond providing actual security and accuracy, BEV must also inspire confidence and trust. The fact that the blockchain protocol is quite complicated may be a barrier to mainstream public acceptability of BEV. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>In assessing the potential impact of BEV, consideration must be given to the values and politics it reflects. BEV does not just digitise the traditional voting process, it proposes an alternative with a different set of values and political foundations. Traditionally, authorities manage elections and the process is black-boxed, centralized and top-down. BEV is the opposite. The process is managed by the people and it is transparent, decentralized and bottom-up. While participation in traditional elections reinforces the authority of the state, participation in BEV asserts the primacy of the people. In this light, it is not surprising that links are drawn between BEV and a transition towards a more direct, decentralized and bottom-up democracy and with 'liquid' democracy as mentioned above. In any case, the extent to which blockchain technology will flourish in the area of e-voting may depend on the extent to which it can reflect the values and structure of society, politics and democracy. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Anticipatory policy-making <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>While organizations are broadly free to organize internal elections with blockchain if they so choose, they must comply with European law on privacy and data protection. Although European law does not specify protocols for political elections in Member States, some convergence has occurred and efforts have been made to encourage use of e-voting while respecting the constitutional principles of electoral law (universal, equal, free, secret and direct suffrage).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>