1. First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) System:

   • Used in: United Kingdom, United States, Canada, India.
   • How it works: Candidates compete in single-member constituencies, and the candidate with the most votes wins. It's a winner-takes-all system.
   • Strengths: Simple and easy to understand. Usually results in a strong, single-party government.
   • Weaknesses: Can lead to a lack of proportional representation, where a party with a significant percentage of the popular vote may have very few seats.

2. Proportional Representation (PR) System:

   • Used in: Germany, Sweden, Israel.
   • How it works: Seats are allocated to parties in proportion to the percentage of votes they receive. There are variations of PR, including Closed List PR and Single Transferable Vote (STV).
   • Strengths: Ensures a more proportional representation of parties, providing smaller parties with a chance to win seats.
   • Weaknesses: Can lead to coalition governments, which may be seen as less stable. Voters may not have a direct representative in their local area.

3. Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) System:

   • Used in: New Zealand, Germany.
   • How it works: Combines elements of FPTP and PR. Voters cast two votes – one for a party and one for a candidate in a single-member constituency. Additional seats are allocated to ensure proportional representation.
   • Strengths: Strikes a balance between local representation and proportionality.
   • Weaknesses: Can be complex for voters to understand. There may still be an element of disproportionality.

4. Single Transferable Vote (STV) System:

   • Used in: Ireland, Malta, Australia (for the Senate).
   • How it works: Multi-member constituencies, and voters rank candidates in order of preference. Candidates must reach a specific quota to be elected, and surplus votes are transferred to other candidates.
   • Strengths: Provides proportional representation, allows voters to express nuanced preferences.
   • Weaknesses: Can be complex, and the counting process may take longer. Results may not be as straightforward as in other systems.

5. Majoritarian Systems:

   • Used in: France (for some elections), the United States (for presidential elections).
   • How it works: A candidate must receive more than 50% of the votes to win. If no candidate achieves this in the first round, a runoff is held between the top two candidates.
   • Strengths: Ensures a clear winner with majority support.
   • Weaknesses: In runoff systems, the first-past-the-post nature can still lead to disproportionate representation. It may exclude smaller parties.

6. Ranked Choice Voting (Instant Runoff Voting):

   • Used in: Some local elections in the United States, Australia (for some elections).
   • How it works: Voters rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate has a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed until a candidate has a majority.
   • Strengths: Encourages candidates to appeal to a broader range of voters. Eliminates the need for separate runoff elections.
   • Weaknesses: Can still be confusing for some voters. The counting process can be more complex.

Recent changes in electoral systems often involve debates over representation, fairness, and stability. For example, referendums or legislative decisions may lead to reforms aimed at addressing perceived shortcomings in existing systems. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of different electoral systems is essential for evaluating their impact on democratic governance.