When a country undertakes a reform to improve how elections are structured and organized, election officials want access to reliable and comparative information. Not only do they need information about the different options available, but also about how many and which countries are actually using those various options. They want to be able to answer questions such as:

• How many countries count their ballots by hand?
• Which countries have special voter education programs targeting women, illiterate voters or minority groups?
• What is standard practice to compile and update voter registers?
• In how many countries is voting compulsory?
• In which countries is the national electoral management body appointed for the election period only?

Whereas information about principles and options within electoral administration and election results has been made available through the ACE Encyclopaedia, the Electoral Process Information Collection (EPIC) project was a systematic collection of how countries actually manage their elections. EPIC has now been integrated as the Comparative Data feature of ACE Electoral Knowledge Network.

By presenting information about electoral systems, electoral management, legislative framework, voter registration, voter education and other related topics in a wide range of countries, users are able to compare, and identify common practice within electoral administration. Online, this unique data collection complements and enriches the body of electoral information currently being accessed on the ACE ElectoralKnowledge Network by election practitioners.

In addition to providing comparative information, this feature is also designed to provide relevant information for electoral country profiles (see Regions & Countries) useful for electoral observation missions, media, and international organisations. Users are able to determine how the country's practices match or divert from regional/global practice.

In summary, Comparative Data:

• offers the information necessary to compare and contrast electoral approaches;
• assists analysts in proposing reforms that meet their particular national requirements and reflect international norms for good election management practices;
• gives electoral designers and analysts insight on the structures within a given country which can be compared with other countries world-wide
• allows election administrators and election assistance providers to research the options available in a reform process and determine common practise;
• allows academics to make analyses in order to evaluate electoral systems and administration;
• gives the media easy access to information to improve the quality of their reporting;
• serves as a building block for the development of election administration as an academic field of study (phD programs).

Methodology of compiling a database

The information available on Comparative Data is compiled through a comprehensive multiple-choice survey about national elections on a country-by-country basis. The multiple-choice aspect of the survey allows for comparative statistics. However, at the same time there are provisions for entering more in-depth information in a comments section following each question.

The survey covers 9 election related topics (matching the existing topic areas on the ACE Encyclopaedia). These are:

• Electoral Systems
• Legislative Framework
• Electoral Management
• Boundary Delimitation
• Voter Registration
• Voter Education
• Parties and Candidates
• Voting Operations
• Vote Counting Media and Elections

--------------------------------

• Direct Democracy

Project Progress

The first phase of the project, including research on 25 countries, was finalised in December 2001. The initial research was mainly done by researchers working from the headquarters of the partner organisations. The researchers stayed in close contact with the Electoral Management Bodies (EMB)in the respective country during this process. This close association was deemed essential for establishing the EPIC site as a a truly authoritative source. During the first phase the survey was fixed after three years of development, additions and changes.

In January 2002, the project entered into its second phase, which includes research on more than 60 countries. The EPIC partners embarked on a regional approach in order to build both local ownership of the project and a more effective research process - the research is conducted by local researchers.

Originally twelve established regional hubs were involved in compiling data for EPIC and included the Association of Central and Eastern European Election Officials (ACEEEO) (Hungary), the Centre pour la Gouvernance Démocratique (CGD) (Burkina Faso), the Electoral Institute of Southern Africa (EISA) (South Africa), the Instituto Federal Electoral (IFE) (Mexico), The Pacific Islands, Australia and New Zealand Electoral Administrators Network (PIANZEA) (Australia), the Servicio Electoral of Chile, the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) (India), the Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND) (Lebanon), the Centre for Democratic Governance (CDD) (Ghana), the African Centre for Economic Growth (ACEG) (Kenya), the Association of Asian Election Authorities (AAEA) (Philippines) and the Centre for Electoral Reform (CETRO) (Indonesia).

The Comparative Data feature (formerly EPIC project) is still very much a work in progress and your patience is appreciated as data is constantly being updated. If you encounter any problems or difficulties, or if you have any suggestions or comments, please let us know by contacting your nearest Regional Electoral Resource Centre (RERC) (see Regions & Countries)