Governments, Get the Message: Text Message Referendum in Mongolia
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Maggie Callahan
October 7, 2019
In 1945, Mongolia held its first national referendum. In this referendum, Mongolians voted overwhelmingly in favor of independence from China. 70 years later, Mongolia is still holding national referendums, but this time Mongolians are voting via text message.
In 2015, Mongolia’s economy was struggling. Citizens feared that the economy would collapse without intervention that would inflate their currency. The government and the citizens were at odds with what method was optimal for achieving this result. There were two prevalent options: expand contracts for gold mining in the Oyu Tolgio mines or begin austere policies and controlling spending.
Because the mines are located in the Gobi Desert, citizens were concerned about how contract expansions would affect landownership, herding spaces and their mining rights. The government argued that such expansion would bring in 6 billion foreign dollars of investment which would stimulate the economy and increase the value of the Mongolian dollar. To settle this disagreement and to gauge public opinion, a referendum was sent out via text message over a four-day period from January 31 to February 3, 2015 to all Mongolian SIM card holders with text messaging capabilities. The government suggested that this referendum was a tool to gauge public opinion and would not be legally binding, meaning the government would not necessarily abide by the outcome of the text message poll.
The referendum was announced in January 2015 via text message. The referendum message itself was sent out weeks later and asked Mongolians if they preferred a period of, “Foreign investment,” or a period of, “Austerity.” The citizens were sent the two options and given the response options; Approve or Refrain.
As citizens received their text message, they began to upload screenshots of their vote on Twitter with messages urging citizens to participate and persuading them of their position. Using the hashtag #15151111, citizens chimed in on their support for either option. Citizens, by using technology, were able to have discussions on policy and participate in a deliberative process across rural and urban centers in Mongolia.
The process was not without faults; using these technologies, citizens urged a protest of the referendum. Some citizens encouraged others to join them in voting for both options in protest of a lack of a third option. Moreover, citizens were disgruntled with how quickly the referendum was planned and enacted. Citizens thought there was insufficient time given to voters to really understand the situation and the options. Those who supported austerity were also concerned that the phrasing of the austere option seemed to imply an economic failure, which discouraged voters from choosing this option.
Ultimately, the referendum did not encourage widespread voter participation. Of the 3 million who received text messages, 356,841 votes were cast. The foreign investment option received 56 percent of these votes and was the path chosen by the government.
Despite its flaws, the referendum did indicate that the government is willing to engage with and glean insight from citizen input. With more time for citizens to research and understand the issues and options at the heart of the referendum, the referendum could have been a great success. Citizens, however, proved able and ready to use technology to discuss and participate in their government. Perhaps text messages could become a key part of ensuring governments get the message on public opinion.
To learn more about this case visit https://participedia.net/case/5685.To read about other innovative applications of public participation visit, www.participedia.net.
Author: Maggie Callahan is a master’s student of public diplomacy at Syracuse University and a graduate assistant for the Participedia Project at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. She holds a bachelor’s in political science and economics from Mercer University and has worked in Georgian, Moroccan and Nepalese nongovernmental organizations and the American government. Follow her on Twitter: @laissezmaggie
(1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Governments, Get the Message: Text Message Referendum in Mongolia
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Maggie Callahan
October 7, 2019
In 1945, Mongolia held its first national referendum. In this referendum, Mongolians voted overwhelmingly in favor of independence from China. 70 years later, Mongolia is still holding national referendums, but this time Mongolians are voting via text message.
In 2015, Mongolia’s economy was struggling. Citizens feared that the economy would collapse without intervention that would inflate their currency. The government and the citizens were at odds with what method was optimal for achieving this result. There were two prevalent options: expand contracts for gold mining in the Oyu Tolgio mines or begin austere policies and controlling spending.
Because the mines are located in the Gobi Desert, citizens were concerned about how contract expansions would affect landownership, herding spaces and their mining rights. The government argued that such expansion would bring in 6 billion foreign dollars of investment which would stimulate the economy and increase the value of the Mongolian dollar. To settle this disagreement and to gauge public opinion, a referendum was sent out via text message over a four-day period from January 31 to February 3, 2015 to all Mongolian SIM card holders with text messaging capabilities. The government suggested that this referendum was a tool to gauge public opinion and would not be legally binding, meaning the government would not necessarily abide by the outcome of the text message poll.
The referendum was announced in January 2015 via text message. The referendum message itself was sent out weeks later and asked Mongolians if they preferred a period of, “Foreign investment,” or a period of, “Austerity.” The citizens were sent the two options and given the response options; Approve or Refrain.
As citizens received their text message, they began to upload screenshots of their vote on Twitter with messages urging citizens to participate and persuading them of their position. Using the hashtag #15151111, citizens chimed in on their support for either option. Citizens, by using technology, were able to have discussions on policy and participate in a deliberative process across rural and urban centers in Mongolia.
The process was not without faults; using these technologies, citizens urged a protest of the referendum. Some citizens encouraged others to join them in voting for both options in protest of a lack of a third option. Moreover, citizens were disgruntled with how quickly the referendum was planned and enacted. Citizens thought there was insufficient time given to voters to really understand the situation and the options. Those who supported austerity were also concerned that the phrasing of the austere option seemed to imply an economic failure, which discouraged voters from choosing this option.
Ultimately, the referendum did not encourage widespread voter participation. Of the 3 million who received text messages, 356,841 votes were cast. The foreign investment option received 56 percent of these votes and was the path chosen by the government.
Despite its flaws, the referendum did indicate that the government is willing to engage with and glean insight from citizen input. With more time for citizens to research and understand the issues and options at the heart of the referendum, the referendum could have been a great success. Citizens, however, proved able and ready to use technology to discuss and participate in their government. Perhaps text messages could become a key part of ensuring governments get the message on public opinion.
To learn more about this case visit https://participedia.net/case/5685.To read about other innovative applications of public participation visit, www.participedia.net.
Author: Maggie Callahan is a master’s student of public diplomacy at Syracuse University and a graduate assistant for the Participedia Project at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. She holds a bachelor’s in political science and economics from Mercer University and has worked in Georgian, Moroccan and Nepalese nongovernmental organizations and the American government. Follow her on Twitter: @laissezmaggie
Follow Us!