130. To get a global perspective, it is helpful to classify the EDR systems found in the contemporary world. There are several criteria for such a classification. 2. Criteria for classifying EDR systems 131. One method would be to examine the various elements that constitute a given EDR system and attempt to identify those which offer the best ways of ensuring that electoral processes comply with the legal framework and respect electoral rights. Leaving aside the possible argument over the definition of ‘best’ in this context, the data that would be needed in order to undertake this task are not systematically collected and are therefore either scarce or non-existent. 132. Nor is it possible to find any significant correlation from a summary analysis between the type of EDRSs and democratic consolidation. Some emerging democracies have placed great emphasis on designing suitable preventive measures, satisfactory mechanisms for electoral challenges and a strict regime of electoral liabilities but, even so, have faced serious electoral disputes, triggering institutional crises. Some stable and mature democracies with fewer preventive measures and a simple and straightforward regime for bringing challenges and assigning liabilities have seen practically no electoral disputes, for example, the Scandinavian countries where the political culture abhors excessive regulation. Others have faced disputes arising from very close election results but, despite the tensions and difficulties at a particular point in time, have been able to overcome the crisis – the most notable recent case being the 2000 presidential election in the United States. It would appear that overcoming an electoral crisis is dependent not only on the framework for dispute prevention and resolution but also on the willingness of the political actors involved to find a compromise. 133. A country’s legal tradition – for example, common law systems, those that follow Roman-Germanic tradition or the civil law, and those that follow a philosophical-religious tradition – is relevant to the functioning of its EDRS. However, it is not the only factor. The United Kingdom and the USA are both common law countries and there are important similarities between their EDRSs, but there are also essential differences between them. The same can be said of Spain, Italy and Uruguay, all of which belong to the civil law tradition. Meanwhile, there are many similarities in practice in the design and operation of EDRSs in countries that belong to different legal traditions, such as those of the USA and Italy; of Ethiopia, the UK, Pakistan and Taiwan; of Spain, Indonesia and Niger; and of the Palestinian Authority and Uruguay. This suggests that the most significant element for distinguishing between EDR systems is to be found elsewhere. 58