Executive summary
The report treats electoral reform as an institutional design problem: representation, governability, legitimacy, constitutional fit, implementation and unintended effects must be assessed together.
A reform can solve one visible distortion while creating a less visible governance problem. Comparative options therefore need explicit criteria, not only political preference.
Key findings
Criteria must precede options
Representation, stability, accountability and constitutional feasibility should be made explicit before models are compared.
Transition design is substantive
Timetables, boundaries, institutions, voter understanding and legal sequencing can determine the result as much as the chosen formula.
Trade-offs cannot be abolished
Reform can rebalance objectives, but no system maximises every democratic value simultaneously.
