How Geography and Voter Turnout Shaped Zambia’s 2021 Presidential Election Outcome
The 2021 presidential elections in Zambia produced a highly
differentiated electoral landscape characterised by regional political
dominance, varying voter turnout levels, and the influence of the rural–urban
voting dichotomy. Beyond the presidential results, constituency-level data
reveals important trends regarding political party dominance, voter turnout,
and a distinct electoral spatial footprint. An interrogation of 156
constituencies shows how the United Party for National Development (UPND) and
the Patriotic Front (PF) performed across the country and how voter turnout
patterns shaped the electoral landscape.
The constituency-level interrogation shows that UPND emerged as the
dominant political party nationally (Table 1). Out of the 156 constituencies interrogated,
UPND dominated 97 constituencies, representing 62.2% of the total. PF dominated
59 constituencies, accounting for 37.8%.
Table 1.
Political Party Dominance by Constituency
|
Political Party |
Constituencies
Dominated |
Percentage |
|
UPND |
97 |
62.2% |
|
PF |
59 |
37.8% |
|
Total |
156 |
100.0% |
UPND’s electoral spatial footprint was more nationally distributed, with
dominance across Southern, Western, North-Western, Central, Lusaka, and
Copperbelt provinces, while PF demonstrated stronger dominance in Eastern,
Luapula, Northern, and Muchinga provinces (Table 2).
Table 2. Constituency
Political Party Dominance by Province
|
Province |
UPND |
PF |
|
Central |
62.5% |
37.5% |
|
Copperbelt |
95.5% |
4.5% |
|
Eastern |
16.7% |
83.3% |
|
Luapula |
6.7% |
93.3% |
|
Lusaka |
66.7% |
33.3% |
|
Muchinga |
0.0% |
100.0% |
|
Northern |
30.8% |
69.2% |
|
North-Western |
100.0% |
0.0% |
|
Southern |
100.0% |
0.0% |
|
Western |
100.0% |
0.0% |
|
Total |
62.2% |
37.8% |
The rural–urban dichotomy also played an important role in shaping the 2021 presidential election outcome. Rural landscapes constituted most of the constituencies, making them strategically significant in determining presidential election outcomes (Table 3).
Table 3.
Rural–Urban Distribution of Constituencies
|
Area |
No. of
Constituencies |
Percentage |
|
Rural |
114 |
73.1% |
|
Urban |
42 |
26.9% |
|
Total |
156 |
100.0% |
Note: Rural-urban differentiation is based on the Zambia 2022 Census of
Population and Housing (Population Summary Report Volume Two, Table 5.2. With
the representative geographic location operational definition being where 50+1%
of a household population resides.
UPND secured majority votes in 65 rural constituencies, representing 57.0% of all rural constituencies, while PF secured 49 rural constituencies, accounting for 43.0%. In urban constituencies, UPND secured 32 constituencies, representing 76.2%, while PF secured 10 constituencies, representing 23.8%. UPND’s stronger urban performance suggests that urban voter preferences demonstrated stronger support for UPND, while rural areas remained comparatively more competitive between the two parties.
Another notable pattern emerges from voter turnout and its association
with party dominance. Voter turnout percentages were categorised into five classes
ranging from the minimum observed turnout of 50.52% to the maximum of 89.70%
(Table 4).
Table 4. Voter
Turnout Classification
|
Class |
Voter Turnout
Range (%) |
|
Very low turnout |
50.52% – 58.35% |
|
Low turnout |
58.36% – 66.19% |
|
Moderate turnout |
66.20% – 74.03% |
|
High turnout |
74.04% – 81.86% |
|
Very high turnout |
81.87% – 89.70% |
Constituencies that had very high turnout and high turnout
were more frequently associated with UPND than PF. UPND dominated 51
constituencies within these turnout classes compared to PF’s 12 constituencies
(Table 5).
Table 5. Voter
Turnout by Political Party
|
Voter Turnout |
UPND |
PF |
Total |
|
Very high |
20 |
20 |
|
|
High |
31 |
12 |
43 |
|
Moderate |
38 |
23 |
61 |
|
Low |
6 |
22 |
28 |
|
Very low |
2 |
2 |
4 |
|
Total |
97 |
59 |
156 |
The concentration of UPND dominance within high-participation constituencies suggests that voter mobilisation constituted a major electoral advantage in the 2021 presidential election.
A further breakdown shows that most very high and high voter turnout constituencies were in rural landscapes (Table 6).
Table 6. Voter
Turnout and Rural–Urban Dichotomy
|
Voter Turnout |
Rural |
Urban |
|
Very high |
100.0% |
0.0% |
|
High |
74.4% |
25.6% |
|
Moderate |
62.3% |
37.7% |
|
Low |
71.4% |
28.6% |
|
Very low |
100.0% |
0.0% |
|
Grand Total |
73.1% |
26.9% |
Among UPND’s 51 constituencies within very high and high voter turnout categories,
41 were rural and 10 were urban. PF recorded 11 rural constituencies and one
urban constituency within the same turnout categories (Table 7).
Table 7. Voter
Turnout and Rural–Urban Dichotomy by Party
|
Geo-Location/ Turnout |
UPND |
PF |
Total |
|
Rural |
|
|
|
|
Very high |
20 |
20 |
|
|
High |
21 |
11 |
32 |
|
Moderate |
18 |
20 |
38 |
|
Low |
4 |
16 |
20 |
|
Very low |
2 |
2 |
4 |
|
Urban |
|
|
|
|
High |
10 |
1 |
11 |
|
Moderate |
20 |
3 |
23 |
|
Low |
2 |
6 |
8 |
|
Total |
97 |
59 |
156 |
The voter turnout data therefore suggests that constituencies with
stronger voter participation were more commonly associated with UPND party
identity during the 2021 presidential election. Lower-turnout constituencies,
on the other hand, appeared more evenly distributed between the two major
political parties.
In addition, a comparative analysis of voter turnout between the 2016 and 2021 presidential elections reveals that turnout patterns were not random or isolated across constituencies. The analysis produced a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.85, indicating a very strong positive relationship between voter turnout levels in the two elections (Figure 1).
Figure 1. 2021, 2016 Presidential Elections Correlation
This suggests that constituencies which recorded comparatively high
voter turnout in 2016 also tended to record comparatively high turnout in 2021.
The findings indicate continuity in constituency-level voter participation
patterns over time, suggesting that electoral mobilisation and voter engagement
may have become structurally embedded within certain constituencies.
Further, a broader historical analysis
of provincial voter turnout trends since the 1991 presidential elections
reinforces the argument that voter participation patterns in Zambia exhibit
strong spatial continuity over time. Provinces such as Southern, North-Western,
Copperbelt, and, more recently, Western Province have consistently recorded
comparatively high voter turnout levels across multiple election cycles,
culminating in exceptionally high turnout levels in 2021 (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Provincial Voter
Turnout Trends (1991-2021)
The persistence of relatively higher
voter turnout within these provinces suggests that voter participation may not
merely reflect election-specific dynamics, but also historically embedded
patterns of political mobilisation and electoral engagement. The findings
therefore indicate that certain electoral spaces in Zambia have evolved into
persistently high-mobilisation regions capable of exerting disproportionate
influence on presidential election outcomes across successive electoral cycles.
Overall, the 2021 presidential
election outcome was
fundamentally shaped by the interaction between geography, voter turnout, and voter
mobilisation. UPND’s electoral success was driven by its broader electoral
spatial footprint across provinces, stronger performance in both rural and
urban constituencies, and its clear association with high voter turnout
constituencies. PF, while remaining competitive in several constituencies,
demonstrated a narrower electoral spatial footprint, most evident from the
election outcomes in Eastern, Luapula, Northern and Muchinga provinces.
The 2021 presidential elections therefore demonstrate how geographic reach and sustained voter mobilisation can become decisive determinants of presidential election outcomes.
In retrospect, several lessons emerge from the foregoing regarding
political party competitiveness.
First, future presidential election competitiveness is likely to depend
increasingly on broader electoral spatial footprints rather than geographically
concentrated regional support.
Second, rural constituencies are likely to remain strategically decisive because they account for more than 70% of all constituencies nationally. Any political party seeking electoral competitiveness must therefore maintain strong rural penetration while simultaneously remaining competitive in urban constituencies, where voter concentration and turnout can significantly influence electoral outcomes.
Third, urban constituencies are likely to become increasingly
influential in shaping future presidential election outcomes. UPND’s
overwhelming dominance in urban constituencies suggests that urban voter
consolidation can provide a significant electoral advantage. As urbanisation
expands, political parties that fail to remain competitive in urban areas may
experience declining national electoral competitiveness.
Fourth, historically high voter turnout constituencies are likely to
remain strategically important battlegrounds in future elections. The strong
positive correlation between voter turnout in the 2016 and 2021 presidential
elections and the observed historical provincial voter turnout trends, suggests
that spatial patterns of voter participation exhibit continuity across election
cycles. Constituencies with historically high turnout may therefore continue to
exert disproportionate influence on future presidential election outcomes,
making them critical targets for sustained political mobilisation.
Fifth, regionally concentrated political support may become increasingly
insufficient for securing national electoral dominance. The 2021 presidential
election demonstrated that a broader electoral spatial footprints provided a
stronger competitive advantage than concentrated regional dominance. Future
presidential elections are therefore likely to reward political parties capable
of expanding support beyond traditional strongholds and building broader
national electoral coalitions.

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home