Elections are fundamental to democracy, but their financial implications are enormous. Around the world, election costs have escalated due to factors such as technological advancements, voter education campaigns, increased security concerns, and logistical challenges. The United States leads in electoral expenditure, with the 2024 general election costing over $15.9 billion, a record-breaking figure, according to the Centre for Responsive Politics.
Similarly, India’s 2019 general election cost approximately $8.6 billion, making it the most expensive in the country’s history, as reported by the Delhi-based Centre for Media Studies. The United Kingdom’s 2019 general election cost around £150 million ($190 million), significantly less than in larger democracies but still substantial. Elsewhere, Brazil spent $500 million on its 2018 elections, while Indonesia’s 2019 general election cost $1 billion. These figures highlight the significant financial burden that comes with upholding democracy.
READ ALSO: The Evolution of Democracy in Africa’s Post-Colonial Era
African countries have held nearly 600 presidential and legislative elections over the past three decades. Data from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) indicates that most nations spend hundreds of millions of dollars per election to finance electoral management body (EMB) activities.
A comprehensive analysis by Jaap van der Straaten from the Civil Registration for Development (CRC4D) reveals that Sub-Saharan Africa has experienced the highest increase in election costs. Between 2000 and 2018, the region spent nearly $125 billion on elections. The election administrative cost (EAC) in Sub-Saharan Africa, which was already high before 2000, widened significantly—from a ratio of 2.3 times ($4.10 versus $1.80) before 2000 to nearly 4.5 times ($11.30 versus $2.90) by 2018.
Nigeria, Africa’s most populous democracy, has some of the continent’s costliest elections. The 2023 general election cost the government approximately $663.2 million, covering logistics, voter registration, security, and technological deployment. This marked a significant increase from the $605 million spent in 2019 and $550 million in 2015. Kenya’s elections are even more expensive per voter. The country spent $370 million on its 2022 general election, with the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) spending approximately $18 per registered voter—one of the highest rates globally. The 2017 election cost Kenya $500 million, largely due to investments in biometric voter registration and electronic result transmission.
Other African nations also bear high electoral costs. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) spent $580 million on its 2018 election despite severe logistical challenges, allegations of fraud, and post-election disputes. In contrast, South Africa has managed relatively cost-effective elections, with its 2019 election costing approximately $140 million. The country benefits from a more established electoral infrastructure and fewer security concerns than nations like Nigeria and Kenya.
Several factors contribute to the high cost of elections in Africa. Poor infrastructure necessitates costly air transportation of electoral materials. Security threats, including electoral violence and insurgencies, require a heavy deployment of security forces, significantly raising expenditure. The increasing reliance on biometric voter registration and electronic voting machines further inflates costs. Additionally, many African elections receive funding from international donors, which can increase expenses due to bureaucratic processes and external monitoring. Corruption and inefficiencies in procurement exacerbate the financial burden.
While high election costs are often justified as necessary for democratic integrity, they raise concerns about governance priorities in African nations facing economic hardship. Nigeria’s $663 million election budget in 2023 was comparable to its annual health budget of $800 million, highlighting the dilemma of resource allocation between governance and essential public services. Similarly, Kenya’s high electoral costs come at a time when the nation is grappling with rising debt and economic challenges, prompting public debate on whether such expenditures are justifiable.
Reducing Election Costs in Africa
Reducing election costs requires strategic reforms. Investing in permanent electoral infrastructure can help minimise recurring expenses. The adoption of digital voting solutions, such as mobile and online voting, could cut down costs related to ballot printing and logistics. Strengthening local funding mechanisms and reducing reliance on foreign donors may also help curb cost inflation. Enhancing transparency in procurement and minimising corruption can further lower election-related expenditures.
Balancing the Cost of Elections and Public Needs
The escalating costs of elections across Africa are often justified as necessary to uphold the integrity and transparency of democratic processes. However, balancing these expenditures with the pressing needs of the population remains crucial. In many African countries, election costs compete directly with urgent priorities such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure development.
In nations where resources are scarce, expensive elections can strain public budgets, leading to trade-offs that may negatively impact the quality of public services. For example, Nigeria’s 2023 election, costing over $663 million, represents a significant financial burden when compared to the country’s $800 million health budget. Citizens frequently question whether such sums could be better spent on pressing issues like healthcare or poverty alleviation.
Efforts to balance election spending with national welfare require structural reforms and greater electoral efficiency. Digital innovation in voting systems, such as e-voting or mobile voting, can reduce logistical costs. Enhancing the capacity of local electoral bodies can also help lower overall expenditures. Ideally, election funding should come from stable, long-term financial mechanisms that reduce dependency on irregular donor assistance, ensuring funds are allocated and utilised efficiently.
One possible solution is increasing electoral transparency in budgeting and procurement. According to the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), some countries have successfully reduced electoral costs by implementing more transparent financial management systems. For instance, South Africa has streamlined its election processes through better coordination between the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) and local authorities, cutting costs without sacrificing quality or integrity.
Ultimately, balancing the financial needs of an election with the socioeconomic demands of the people is a delicate process. Governments must carefully weigh the immediate benefits of democratic processes against the long-term impact of neglecting essential public services. Engaging citizens and civil society in this conversation can foster a more sustainable approach to election financing, ensuring that democracy’s cost does not come at the expense of the people’s well-being.
