The nature of the EMB, in terms of power concentration or devolution, depends very much on the system of government in the country and will usually be defined in the electoral law. The legal framework may distinguish between powers and functions given to a central or national EMB and those given to regional or lower-level EMBs. Such vertical divisions of powers and functions may be between different branch levels of the one national EMB, between a national EMB and separate provincial EMBs, as in Indonesia, or between national and local EMBs, as in the UK.

It is common in a unitary system, such as those of Costa Rica, Ghana and the Philippines, to have one central EMB that is responsible for all elections but with subordinate offices at both provincial and local levels. Countries whose laws define separate, hierarchically accountable EMBs at national, regional, administrative district, and even village level often assign devolved or different powers and responsibilities to each level. Electoral legal frameworks that are modelled on a central EMB devolving responsibilities for implementing some electoral functions are in place in many countries, such as Lithuania and Slovakia.

Countries with Governmental or Mixed Model EMBs may rely on local authorities to conduct all or part of electoral activities. For example, Sweden operates a highly decentralized EMB structure which consists of a national EMB for policy coordination and local authorities which manage elections, and Hungary and Switzerland devolve some powers to local EMBs. Devolving electoral powers and responsibilities to local authorities without appropriate oversight may make it more difficult to maintain electoral consistency, service, quality, and ultimately the freedom and fairness of elections. The United States provides a good example of this difficulty.

• Decentralised EMB structures can ensure continuity in the EMBs work, especially where the EMB has responsibility for recurring tasks such as continuous voter registration.
• Decentralised EMBs, even if only temporary at lower levels, can enhance inclusiveness and transparency in electoral management.
• The sustainability and relative costs of permanent over temporary EMBs at regional and/or lower levels needs to be considered, as well as the advantages.