Democracy indices

{{dablinks|date=May 2026}} {{short description|Overview of democracy measures}} {{Use dmy dates|date=October 2025}} {{Democracy}}  '''Democracy indices''' / '''rankings''' are [[Quantitative research|quantitative]] and [[comparative politics|comparative]] '''measurements''' of the state of democracy<ref name="Geissel Kneuer Lauth 2016 pp. 571–579">{{cite journal | last1=Geissel | first1=Brigitte | last2=Kneuer | first2=Marianne | last3=Lauth | first3=Hans-Joachim | title=Measuring the quality of democracy: Introduction | journal=International Political Science Review | publisher=Sage Publications | volume=37 | issue=5 | year=2016 | issn=0192-5121| jstor=26556872 | pages=571–579 | doi=10.1177/0192512116669141 | s2cid=151808737 | url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26556872 | access-date=2023-04-03| url-access=subscription }}</ref> for different countries according to various definitions<ref name="Greenwood 2022">{{cite web | last=Greenwood | first=Shannon | title=Appendix A: Classifying democracies | website=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project | date=2022-12-06 | url=https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2022/12/06/online-civic-engagement-spring-2022-appendix-a-classifying-democracies/ | access-date=2022-12-27}}</ref> and concepts of democracy, to allow for their assessment, and development.

The democracy indices / rankings differ in whether they are categorical, such as classifying countries into democracies, [[hybrid regime]]s, and [[autocracies]],<ref name="Dobratz 2015 p. 47">{{cite book |last=Dobratz |first=B. A. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RoK9CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA47 |title=Power, Politics, and Society: An Introduction to Political Sociology |publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2015 |isbn=978-1-317-34529-9 |page=47 |access-date=Apr 30, 2023}}</ref><ref name="Michie 2014 p. 95">{{cite book | last=Michie | first=J. | title=Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences | publisher=Taylor & Francis | year=2014 | isbn=978-1-135-93226-8 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ip_IAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA95 | access-date=2023-04-03 | pages=95–97}}</ref> or continuous values.<ref name="Our World in Data 2022a">{{cite web | title=Democracy data: how do researchers measure democracy? | website=Our World in Data | date=Jun 17, 2022 | url=https://ourworldindata.org/democracies-measurement | access-date=Apr 17, 2023}}</ref> The qualitative nature of democracy indices / rankings enables data analytical approaches for studying [[causality|causal]] mechanisms of regime transformation processes.  Democracy indices / rankings vary in their scope and the weight assigned to different aspects of democracy. These aspects include the breadth and strength of core democratic institutions, [[freedom of expression]], the competitiveness and inclusiveness of [[polyarchy]], governance quality, adherence to democratic norms, co-option of opposition, and other related factors, such as [[electoral reform|electoral system manipulation]], [[electoral fraud]], and popular support of anti-democratic alternatives.<ref name="Our World in Data 2022">{{cite web | title=The 'Varieties of Democracy' data: how do researchers measure democracy? | website=Our World in Data | date=2022-11-30 | url=https://ourworldindata.org/vdem-electoral-democracy-data | access-date=2023-04-03}}</ref><ref name="Freedom House">{{cite web | title=Breaking Down Democracy | website=Freedom House | url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/special-report/2017/breaking-down-democracy | access-date=2023-04-03}}</ref><ref>[https://connect.apsanet.org/s35/wp-content/uploads/sites/26/2023/06/Democracy-and-Autocracy-211_June-2023.pdf "Democracy and Autocracy, Why do Democracies Develop and Decline", Vol. 21(1) June 2023, Democracy and Autocracy Section, American Political Science Association].</ref>

==Prominent democracy indices== {{multiple image |direction = vertical |width = 250 |image1 = 2023 Freedom in the World.png |caption1 = Country ratings from [[Freedom House]]'s ''[[Freedom in the World]]'' survey map for 2022 |image2 = Economist_Intelligence_Unit_Democracy_Index_2024.svg |caption2 = [[The Economist]]'s ''[[Economist Intelligence Unit|EIU]] [[The Economist Democracy Index|Democracy Index]]'' map for 2024 |image3 = V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index 2026 World.svg |caption3 = ''V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index'' map for 2025<ref name="j496">{{cite web|title=Democracy Report 2026, Unraveling The Democratic Era?|url=https://v-dem.net/documents/75/V-Dem_Institute_Democracy_Report_2026_lowres.pdf|access-date=2026-03-17}}</ref> |image4 = 1790- Electoral and liberal democracy indices - world.svg |caption4 = V-Dem Electoral and Liberal Democracy Indices for the world, 1790–<ref>{{cite web |title=Country Graph |url=https://www.v-dem.net/data_analysis/CountryGraph/ |publisher=V-Dem Institute |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260301172546/https://www.v-dem.net/data_analysis/CountryGraph/ |archive-date=1 March 2026 |date=March 2026 |url-status=live}} (Choose "World" and under "VDem Indices" select "Election Democracy Index" and "Liberal Democracy Index". Click on the three horizontal lines in the upper right, and in the resulting drop-down menu choose "Download Graph Data as CSV")</ref> |image5 = BTI 2022 DEM.jpg |caption5 = Global trend report analyzes the results of the ''[[Bertelsmann Transformation Index]]'' 2022<ref name="BTI 2022a">{{cite web|title=Global Dashboard|website=BTI 2022|url=https://bti-project.org/en/reports/global-dashboard?&cb=00000|access-date=Apr 17, 2023}}</ref> |image6 = |caption6 = }} * ''[[Freedom in the World]]'', a yearly survey and report by the U.S.-based<ref name=":0">{{cite web |author=Ide |first=William |date=January 11, 2000 |title=Freedom House Report: Asia Sees Some Significant Progress |url=https://www.voanews.com/a/report--asia-sees-some-significant-progress-81235887/165280.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131204022723/http://www.voanews.com/content/report--asia-sees-some-significant-progress-81235887/165280.html |archive-date=4 December 2013 |access-date=October 13, 2012 |publisher=Voice of America |df=dmy}}</ref> [[non-governmental organization]] ''[[Freedom House]]''. It measures the degree of [[civil liberties]] and [[Civil and political rights|political rights]] in the world nations. Depending on the ratings, the nations are then classified as ''"Free"'', ''"Partly Free"'', or ''"Not Free"''.<ref name="Freedom House 2021">{{cite web |date=2021-02-01 |title=Freedom in the World |url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world |access-date=2023-04-03 |website=Freedom House}}</ref> * ''[[The Economist Democracy Index]]'', by the UK-based ''[[Economist Intelligence Unit|Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)]]'', is an assessment of countries' democracy. Countries are rated as ''"full democracies"'', ''"flawed democracies"'', ''"hybrid regimes"'', or ''"authoritarian regimes"''. The index is based on five categories measuring ''"electoral processes and pluralism"'', ''"functioning of government, governance"'', ''"civil liberties"'', ''"political'' [indirect, electoral]<ref>for indirect and direct participation see e.g. [http://participation.direct/ participation.direct] [http://participation.direct/words-theory/ participation.direct/words-theory], [http://participation.direct/in-politics/ participation.direct/in-politics]</ref> ''participation"'' and ''"political culture"''.<ref name="Democracy">{{Cite web |title=An EIU report: Democracy Index 2025|url=https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2025/ |website=[[Economist Intelligence Unit]]}}</ref> * The ''[[V-Dem Democracy Indices]]'', by the ''[[V-Dem Institute]]'' ([[University of Gothenburg]]), distinguishes between five high-level principles of democracy: ''"electoral"'', ''"liberal"'', ''"participatory"'', ''"deliberative"'' and ''"egalitarian"'', and quantifies these principles.<ref>{{Citation |title=Democracy Report 2022: Autocratization Changing Nature? |work=[[V-Dem Institute]] |url=https://v-dem.net/media/publications/dr_2022.pdf |publisher=[[University of Gothenburg]]}}.</ref> The ''V-Dem Democracy indices'' include the ''[[Direct democracy#Direct democracy by country|Citizen-initiated component of direct popular vote index]]'', which indicates the strength of some aspects of "[[direct democracy]]" and the ''[[Presidential system#Presidentialism metrics|presidentialism index]]'', which indicates higher concentration of political power in the hands of one individual. * The ''[[Bertelsmann Transformation Index]]'', by the ''[[Bertelsmann Stiftung]]'', evaluates the development status and governance of political and economic transformation processes on the path to constitutional democracy and a market economy for developing and transition countries around the world. Bertelsmann Transformation Index categorizes countries into: hard-line autocracy, moderate autocracy, very defective democracy, defective democracy, and consolidating democracy.<ref name="BTI 2022">{{cite web | title=Governance Report | website=BTI 2022 | url=https://bti-project.org/en/reports/global/governance-report | access-date=Apr 17, 2023 | archive-date=20 September 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210920050816/https://bti-project.org/en/reports/global/governance-report | url-status=dead }}</ref> * ''The Global State of Democracy Indices'', by the ''[[International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance]]'', assesses democratic performance using different types of sources: expert surveys, standards-based coding by research groups and analysts, observational data and composite measures.<ref name="International IDEA 2023">{{cite web | title=The Global State of Democracy Indices | website=International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance | url=https://www.idea.int/gsod-indices/democracy-indices/ | access-date=May 26, 2023 | archive-date=4 November 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211104092733/https://www.idea.int/gsod-indices/democracy-indices/ | url-status=dead }}</ref> *The ''[[Alliance of Democracies#Democracy Perception Index|Democracy Perception Index]]'', published annually by the ''[[Alliance of Democracies]]'', is the world's largest annual survey on how people perceive the state of democracy<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.allianceofdemocracies.org/democracy-perception-index | title=Democracy Perception Index – Alliance of Democracies }}</ref> (cf. the ''[[Corruption Perceptions Index|Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI)]]'' by ''[[Transparency International]]'', which similarly seeks to measure public perception of corruption).

=== Projects === * The ''[[Referendum Database]] (RDB'', since 2022), a database with information on direct democracy institutions such as [[referendum]] and [[popular initiative|initiative]], or of those of representative democracies, authoritarian or totaliarian regimes such as [[plebiscite]]s (referendums from above),<ref name="swissinfo260506">Benjamin von Wyl, edited by Mark Livingston, adapted from German by Julia Bassam: ''[https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/global-elections/swiss-report-sheds-light-on-state-of-direct-democracy-worldwide/91366238?linkType=guid&utm_source=multiple&utm_campaign=swi-rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_content=o Swiss report sheds light on state of direct democracy worldwide] – The Centre for Democracy Studies Aarau now produces an annual overview of referendums held in Switzerland and around the world. Political expert Mara Labud explains why this is important.'', [[swissinfo.ch]], May 6, 2026</ref> as well as their use in popular votes<ref>(de) [https://www.zdaarau.ch/de/themen/abstimmungsdatenbank/ zdaarau.ch/de/themen/abstimmungsdatenbank]</ref><ref name="c2d.ch">[https://c2d.ch c2d.ch]</ref> with ''[[Varieties of Referendums]] ([[V-Ref]]'', integrity of referendums, indicators for measuring their quality, a 2026–2029 project financed by [[Swiss National Science Foundation|SNF]] and [[German Research Foundation|DFG]]) of the [[Centre for Research on Direct Democracy]] (c2d / C2D)<ref name="c2d.ch"/> at the [[Centre for Democracy Aarau]] (ZDA). :One of their main reports<ref>''[https://www.zdaarau.ch/en/research/publications/study-reports-of-the-zda/ Study reports of the ZDA]'', on zdaarau.ch</ref> already published is ''The World of Referendums (WoR), Yearly Referendum Database (RDB) report'' series.<ref name="swissinfo260506"/><ref name="wor">[https://report.rdb.vote ''The World of Referendums (WoR), Yearly Referendum Database (RDB) report''] series, on report.rdb.vote</ref> :''RDB'' is a further development of the ''c2d database''<ref name="c2d.ch"/> of the Centre for Research on Direct Democracy (c2d) founded 1993 by [[Andreas Auer]] at the [[University of Geneva]] (in 2007 Auer also co-founded the ZDA in [[Aarau]] and moved the c2d there).<ref>(de) [https://www.uzh.ch/de/explore/management/professorships/in_memoriam/2018/Andreas-Auer.html uzh.ch/de/explore/management/professorships/in_memoriam/2018/Andreas-Auer.html]</ref><ref name="wor"/>

* The ''[[Democracy Barometer]],''<ref>[https://democracybarometer.org/ democracybarometer.org]</ref> of the Centre for Democracy Aarau (ZDA) and the Department of Political Science at the [[University of Zurich]], measures the quality of (so far) some of the established democracies with comparative data on the principles of ''"freedom" ("individual liberties", "rule of law", "public sphere"), "control" ("competition", "mutual constraints", "governmental capability"), "equality" ("transparency", "participation", "representation")'', lists the indicators used to calculate these principles and produces Country reports and additional materials (codebook, methodology).

=== Indices measuring aspects of democracy === * The ''[[Effective Number of Parties]]'' is an index of the adjusted number of political parties in a country's party system.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Laakso |first1=Markku |last2=Taagepera |first2=Rein |date=1979 |title='Effective' Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe |journal=Comparative Political Studies |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=3–27 |doi=10.1177/001041407901200101 |s2cid=143250203 |issn=0010-4140 |url=https://escholarship.org/uc/item/703827nv}}</ref> * The ''[[Electoral Integrity Project]]'' surveys academics on the perceived electoral integrity of countries and subnational entities {{multiple image |direction = vertical |width = 250 |image1 = Failed-states-index-loop-2013b.gif |caption1 = ''[[Fragile States Index]]'' 2005–2013 }} * The ''[[Fragile States Index]]'', formerly the Failed States Index, is an annual report that aims to assess states' vulnerability to conflict or collapse, ranking all sovereign states with membership in the United Nations where there is enough data available for analysis.<ref name="FAQ">{{cite web |url=http://www.fundforpeace.org/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=327 |title=Failed States FAQ |publisher= Fund for Peace |access-date=2007-08-25 |archive-date=2010-11-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101118014620/http://www.fundforpeace.org/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=327 |url-status=dead }}</ref> * The ''[[Gallagher index]]'' measures an electoral system's relative disproportionality between votes received and seats in a legislature.<ref name="iscanadafair.ca">{{cite web |title=The Gallagher Index |url=https://iscanadafair.ca/gallagher-index/ |access-date=Apr 3, 2023 |website=iscanadafair.ca}}</ref> * The ''[[Pedersen index]]'' is a measure of political volatility in party systems. * The government distance measures the substantive [[political representation]] congruence as the political distance between the government and the [[median voter theorem|median voter]].<ref name="b461">{{cite journal | last1=Huber | first1=John D. | last2=Powell | first2=G. Bingham | title=Congruence between Citizens and Policymakers in Two Visions of Liberal Democracy | journal=World Politics | volume=46 | issue=3 | date=1994 | issn=0043-8871 | doi=10.2307/2950684 | url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0043887100010017/type/journal_article | access-date=2026-04-28 |at=footnote 40}}</ref>

Other measured aspects of democracy include [[voter turnout]], [[efficiency gap]], [[wasted vote]], and [[political efficacy]].<ref name="fuqi3">{{cite journal | last1=Karp | first1=Jeffrey A. | last2=Banducci | first2=Susan A. | title=Political Efficacy and Participation in Twenty-Seven Democracies: How Electoral Systems Shape Political Behaviour | journal=British Journal of Political Science | publisher=Cambridge University Press | volume=38 | issue=2 | year=2008 | issn=0007-1234| jstor=27568347|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/27568347 | access-date=2023-06-16 | pages=311–334| doi=10.1017/S0007123408000161 | hdl=10036/64393 | s2cid=55486399 | hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref name="u3a5l">{{cite web |title=Internal and external political efficacy – Government at a Glance 2021 |url=https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/b6d836a0-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/b6d836a0-en |access-date=2023-06-16 |website=OECD iLibrary |archive-date=6 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211006202951/https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/b6d836a0-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/b6d836a0-en |url-status=dead }}</ref>

=== Historical=== {{multiple image |direction = vertical |width = 250 |image1 = DD classification 2008 dataset Cheibub visualized hanteng en.png |caption1 = ''[[Democracy-Dictatorship Index]]'' in 2008<ref name="Cheibub2010">{{cite journal |last1=Cheibub |first1=José Antonio |last2=Gandhi |first2=Jennifer |last3 = Vreeland |first3=James Raymond |title=Democracy and dictatorship revisited |journal=[[Public Choice (journal)|Public Choice]] |volume=143 |issue=1–2 |pages=67–101 |doi=10.1007/s11127-009-9491-2 |jstor=40661005 |date=April 2010 |s2cid=45234838}}</ref> }} * The ''[[Democracy-Dictatorship Index]]'' was a binary measure of democracy and dictatorship.<ref name="Kaggle 2020">{{cite web | title=Democracy-Dictatorship_Index | website=Kaggle | date=Jul 17, 2020 | url=https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/mathurinache/democracy-dictatorship-index| access-date=Apr 3, 2023}}</ref> * The ''[[Democracy Ranking]]'' was a democracy ranking by the ''Association for Development and Advancement of the Democracy Award''.<ref name="Democracy Ranking 2017">{{cite web | title=Home | website=Democracy Ranking | date=Feb 12, 2017 | url=http://democracyranking.org/wordpress/ | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130911030535/http://democracyranking.org/wordpress/ | url-status=usurped | archive-date=September 11, 2013 | language=de | access-date=Apr 3, 2023}}</ref> * The ''[[Polity data series]]'' contains annual information on regime authority characteristics and covers the years 1800–2018 based on competitiveness, openness, and level of participation, sponsored by the [[Political Instability Task Force]] (PITF).<ref>{{cite web|title=Polity IV Project|url=http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm|at=Table footnote|access-date=11 Jan 2020|archive-date=4 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200504221240/http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> * ''[[Boix-Miller-Rosato dichotomous coding of democracy]]'', easy-to-observe characteristics, few evaluations by own researchers based on academic literature. As a classification: non-democracy to democracy.<ref name="xmarquez.github.io">{{cite web |title=Boix-Miller-Rosato dichotomous coding of democracy, 1800–2020, version 4.0 – bmr |url=https://xmarquez.github.io/democracyData/reference/bmr.html |access-date=April 17, 2023 |website=xmarquez.github.io}}</ref> * ''[[Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy]] (LIED)'' by Skaaning et al. democracy's characteristics assessed with easy-to-observe characteristics, few evaluations by own researchers based on academic research, and evaluating whether necessary characteristics are present.<ref name="Skaaning Gerring Bartusevičius 2015 pp. 1491–1525">{{cite journal | last1=Skaaning | first1=Svend-Erik | last2=Gerring | first2=John | last3=Bartusevičius | first3=Henrikas | title=A Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy | journal=Comparative Political Studies | publisher=Sage Publications | volume=48 | issue=12 | date=Apr 26, 2015 | issn=0010-4140 | doi=10.1177/0010414015581050 | pages=1491–1525| s2cid=16062427 | url=https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/110316577/A_Lexical_Index_of_Electoral_Democracy_postprint_2015.pdf }}</ref> *The ''[[Index of Democratization]]'' created by [[Tatu Vanhanen]].

==Measuring democracy== ===Difficulties in measuring democracy===  Democracy is a multifaceted concept encompassing the functioning of diverse institutions, many of which are challenging to measure. As a result, limitations arise in quantifying and econometrically analyzing democracy's potential effects or its relationships with other phenomena, such as inequality, poverty, and education. etc.<ref name="krauss">{{Cite journal|url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1350178X.2015.1069372|title=The scientific limits of understanding the (potential) relationship between complex social phenomena: the case of democracy and inequality|first=Alexander|last=Krauss|date=January 2, 2016|journal=Journal of Economic Methodology|volume=23|issue=1|pages=97–109|via=CrossRef|doi=10.1080/1350178X.2015.1069372|s2cid=51782149 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Given the challenges of obtaining reliable data on within-country variations in aspects of democracy, much of the academic focus has been on cross-country comparisons. However, significant variations in democratic institutions can exist within individual countries, highlighting the limitations of such an approach.

Another dimension of the difficulty in measuring democracy lies in the ongoing debate between minimalist and maximalist definitions of democracy. A minimalist conception of democracy defines democracy by primarily considering the essence of democracy; such as electoral procedures.<ref>Dahl, Robert A.; Ian Shapiro; José Antônio Cheibub; and Adam Przeworski. "Minimalist Conception of Democracy: A Defense." Essay. ''In The Democracy Sourcebook'', pp. 12–17. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 2003.</ref> A maximalist definition of democracy can include outcomes, such as economic or administrative efficiency, into measures of democracy.<ref>Schmitter, Philippe C. and Terry Lynn Karl. 1991. "What Democracy is.. . and is Not." ''Journal of Democracy'' 2 (3): 75–88</ref> Some aspects of democracy, such as responsiveness<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016633226 | doi=10.1177/0010414016633226 | title=Advances in the Study of Democratic Responsiveness: An Introduction | date=2017 | last1=Esaiasson | first1=Peter | last2=Wlezien | first2=Christopher | journal=Comparative Political Studies | volume=50 | issue=6 | pages=699–710 | url-access=subscription }}</ref> or [[accountability]], are generally not included in democracy indices / rankings due to the difficulty measuring these aspects. Other aspects, such as [[Judicial independence#Judicial independence metrics|judicial independence]] or quality of the [[electoral system]], are included in some democracy indices / rankings but not in others.

Some measures of democracy, such as Freedom House and Polity IV, adopt a maximalist understanding of democracy by analyzing indicators that extend beyond mere electoral procedures. These measures aim to capture broader dimensions of democratic governance, reflecting a more comprehensive view of political systems.<ref>''The Journal of Politics''. 70 (3): 632–647.</ref> These measures attempt to gauge contestation and inclusion; two features Robert Dahl argued are essential in democracies that successfully promote accountable governments.<ref>Samuels, David. "Chapter 3: Democratic Political Regimes." Essay. In ''Comparative Politics''. New York: Pearson Education, 2013.</ref><ref>Clark, William Roberts; Matt Golder; and Sona Nadenichek Golder. "Chapter 5: Economic Determinates of Democracy." Chapter. In ''Foundations of Comparative Politics'', pp. 351–392.</ref> The democratic rating given by these mainstream measures can vary greatly depending on the indicators and evidence they deploy.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Högström |first=John |date=2013 |title=Does the Choice of Democracy Measure Matter? Comparisons between the Two Leading Democracy Indices, Freedom House and Polity IV |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0017257X12000103/type/journal_article |journal=Government and Opposition |volume=48 |issue=2 |pages=201–221 |doi=10.1017/gov.2012.10}}</ref> The definition of democracy utilized by these measures is important because of the discouraging and alienating power such ratings can have, particularly when determined by indicators which are biased toward Western democracies.<ref>Piironen, Ossi. 2005. "Minimalist Democracy without Substance? an Evaluation of the Mainstream Measures of Democracy." ''Politiikka''. 47 (3): 189–204.</ref>

Dieter Fuchs and Edeltraud Roller argue that accurately measuring the quality of democracy requires complementing objective metrics with subjective measurements that reflect the perspectives and experiences of citizens.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Fuchs |first1=Dieter |last2=Roller |first2=Edeltraud |title=Conceptualizing and Measuring the Quality of Democracy: The Citizens' Perspective |journal=Politics and Governance |volume=6 |issue=1 |page=22 |doi=10.17645/pag.v6i1.1188 |year=2018 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Similarly, Quinton Mayne and Brigitte Geißel also defend that the quality of democracy does not depend exclusively on the performance of institutions, but also on the citizens' own dispositions and commitment.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mayne |first1=Quinton |last2=Geißel |first2=Brigitte |title=Don't Good Democracies Need 'Good' Citizens? Citizen Dispositions and the Study of Democratic Quality |journal=Politics and Governance |volume=6 |issue=1 |page=33 |doi=10.17645/pag.v6i1.1216 |year=2018 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

===Critiques of measures of democracy=== Data on democracy, and particularly global indices of democracy, and the data they rely on, have been the subject of scrutiny and criticized by various scholars. [[Gerardo L. Munck]] and Jay Verkuilen for instance, have raised concerns about the methods used by prominent democracy indices / rankings such as Freedom House and Polity, such as the concept of democracy they measured, the design of indicators, and the aggregation rule.<ref>Gerardo L. Munck and Jay Verkuilen, "Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: Evaluating Alternative Indices," ''Comparative Political Studies.'' 35, 1 (2002): 5–34. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.469.3177&rep=rep1&type=pdf.</ref> Political scientists Andrew T. Little and Anne Meng "highlight measurement concerns regarding time-varying bias in expert-coded data" such as Freedom House and V-Dem and encourage improving expert-coding practices.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Little |first1=Andrew T. |last2=Meng |first2=Anne |date=2024-01-11 |title=Measuring Democratic Backsliding |journal=PS: Political Science & Politics |volume=57 |issue=2 |pages=149–161 |doi=10.1017/S104909652300063X |issn=1049-0965|doi-access=free }}</ref> Knutsen et al.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Knutsen |first1=Carl Henrik |last2=Marquardt |first2=Kyle L. |last3=Seim |first3=Brigitte |last4=Coppedge |first4=Michael |last5=Edgell |first5=Amanda B. |last6=Medzihorsky |first6=Juraj |last7=Pemstein |first7=Daniel |last8=Teorell |first8=Jan |last9=Gerring |first9=John |last10=Lindberg |first10=Staffan I. |date=2024-01-11 |title=Conceptual and Measurement Issues in Assessing Democratic Backsliding |journal=PS: Political Science & Politics |volume=57 |issue=2 |pages=162–177 |doi=10.1017/S104909652300077X |issn=1049-0965|doi-access=free }}</ref> did not see evidence for time-varying bias in their expert-coded data and note the application of [[item response theory]], [[factor analysis]] and estimates of uncertainties to limit expert biases while discussing concerns in [[operationalization]] of observer-invariant measures of democracy.

==Problems and challenges of measuring democracy, seeking for ways out==  {{multiple image |direction = vertical |width = 250 |header = Quality of democracy – and the problems of measuring it |image1 = Quality of democracy – and the problems of measuring it.png |caption1 = Same country ([[Russia]]), two approaches, concepts: [[Polity IV]] vs [[Freedom House]]<ref name="gunitsky"/> |image2 = Quality of democracy – and the problems of measuring it (7 rankings).png |caption2 = Same country ([[Russia]]), seven approaches, concepts: [[Polity IV]], [[Freedom House]], [[The Economist Democracy Index| Democracy Index (EIU)]], Coppedge-Alvarez-Maldonado (CAM), [[Tatu Vanhanen|Vanhanen's Index (VAN)]], Unified Democracy Scores (UDS), [[Democracy-Dictatorship Index|DD index (PACL)]]<ref name="gunitskygrayzone"/> }} Seeking for ways out, for consensus about how to [[conceptualize]] and measure [[regime]]s, from [[Democracy|democratic]] to [[authoritarian]] or [[totalitarian]], so that meaningful comparisons can be made through time and across countries, is still an open, challenging task for the scientific community.<ref name="copgeretal">Michael Coppedge, John Gerring et al.: ''Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach'' – see [[#Further reading|further reading]] below</ref>

In 2015, [[Seva Gunitsky]] wrote in the ''[[Washington Post]]'', based upon his research for ''Ranking the World – Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance'',<ref name="rankingtheworld">''Ranking the World – Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance'', 2015 – see [[#Further reading|further reading]] below</ref> that [[measuring democracy]] can mislead as much as clarify – a problem for academics, policy-makers and anyone who cares about democracy.<ref name="gunitsky">Seva Gunitsky: ''How do you measure ‘democracy’?'', 2015 – see [[#Further reading|further reading]] below</ref>

In his contribution ''Lost in the Gray Zone: Competing Measures of Democracy in the Former Soviet Republics''<ref name="gunitskygrayzone">Seva Gunitsky: ''Lost in the Gray Zone: Competing Measures of Democracy in the Former Soviet Republics'', in ''Ranking the World'' – see [[#Further reading|further reading]] below</ref> in ''Ranking the World'',<ref name="rankingtheworld"/> he, on the example of [[former Soviet republics]], examines fundamental problems with measures of democracy, observing that indices often disagree and occasionally draw contradictory conclusions from observing the same event. He argues, that this reflects [[inherent]] [[tradeoff]]s in conceptualizing [[democratic governance]], which arise from fundamental [[normative]] disagreements about a highly contested concept.

===Conceptualizing and measuring democracy===  In 2011, [[Michael Coppedge]], [[John Gerring]] et al. proposed an approach to such conceptualization and measurement. In their paper ''Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach''<ref name="copgeretal"/> they review some of the weaknesses among contemporary and older [[approache]]s, then lay out their approach, characterizing it as ''historical'', ''multidimensional'', ''disaggregated'', and ''transparent''.

The authors propose to create a new set of [[indicator]]s, four features, considered together, to conceptualize and measure democracy. First, ''[[historical]]'', extending indicators of democracy back through modern history, wherever possible. Second, a ''[[multidimensional]]'' approach to the problem of conceptualizing democracy. Third, to collect information relevant to democracy at a highly ''[[disaggregate]]d'' level. Fourth, ''[[Transparency (behavior)|transparent]]'', a strategy for data collection and presentation that should enhance the [[precision]], [[validity]], [[Transparency (behavior)|transparency]], and [[legitimacy]] of the resulting indicators.

They also sum up the [[conception]]s – and/or (rather) aspects<ref name="wppd1303-2605">working paper by Vladimir Rott, [http://participation.direct participation.direct], March 2013 / May 2016 (PDF upon request)</ref> – of democracy into six – ''electoral'', ''liberal'', ''majoritarian'', ''participatory'', ''deliberative'', and ''egalitarian'', which taken together offer a fairly comprehensive accounting of the concept of democracy as it is employed today (see overview in the table below).

In the [[conclusion]] they review some of the [[payoff]]s such an approach might bring to the study – and possibly development<ref name="wppd1303-2605"/> – of democracy. {| style="background-color:#f1f1f1;" |- |colspan=5|<hr> |- |colspan=5|'''Conceptions of democracy''' – overview (Michael Coppedge, John Gerring et al., 2011<ref name="copgeretal"/>) |- |colspan=5|<hr> |- valign=top |  |width=25%|  |width=25%|Principles |width=25%|Question |width=25%|Institutions |- |colspan=5|<hr> |- valign=top |I. |'''[[Electoral democracy|Electoral]]''' (aka elite, minimal, realist, [[Schumpeter]]ian) |Contestation, competition |Are government offices filled by free and fair multiparty elections? |Elections, political parties, competitiveness and turnover |- valign=top |II. |'''[[Liberal democracy|Liberal]]''' (aka consensus, pluralist) |Limited government, multiple veto points, horizontal accountability, individual rights, civil liberties, transparency |Is political power decentralized & constrained? |Multiple, independent, and decentralized, with special focus on the role of the media, interest groups, the judiciary, and a written constitution with explicit guarantees |- valign=top |III. |'''[[Majoritarian democracy|Majoritarian]]''' (aka responsible party government) |Majority rule, centralization, vertical accountability |Does the majority (or plurality) rule? |Consolidated and centralized, with special focus on the role of political parties |- valign=top |IV. |'''[[Participatory democracy|Participatory]]''' |Government by the people |Do ordinary citizens participate in politics?<ref>''direct and/or indirect participation?'' see e.g. [http://participation.direct participation.direct], [http://participation.direct/words-theory/ participation.direct/words-theory], [http://participation.direct/in-politics/ participation.direct/in-politics]</ref> |Election law, civil society, local government, direct democracy |- valign=top |V. |'''[[Deliberative democracy|Deliberative]]''' |Government by reason |Are political decisions the product of public deliberation? |Media, hearings, panels, other deliberative bodies<ref>''throughout the whole society / all the people in all things in common?'' see e.g. [http://participation.direct participation.direct], [http://participation.direct/in-politics/ participation.direct/in-politics], [http://participation.direct/participation-for-all/ participation.direct/participation-for-all]</ref> |- valign=top |VI. |'''[[Egalitarian democracy|Egalitarian]]''' |Political equality |Are all citizens equally empowered? |Designed to ensure equal participation, representation, protection, and politically relevant resources |- |colspan=5|<hr> |}

== See also == {{Portal|Politics}} *[[Corruption Perceptions Index|Corruption Perception Index]] *[[Democratic backsliding by country]] *[[Democratic transition]] *[[Types of democracy]] *[[List of international rankings]] *[[List of freedom indices]] *[[List of globalization-related indices]] *[[List of countries by system of government]] *[[List of forms of government]]

==References == {{Reflist}}

== Further reading ==  {{refbegin}} *{{cite book |last=Munck |first=G. L. |title=Measuring Democracy: A Bridge between Scholarship and Politics |publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press |series=Democratic Transition and Consolidation |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-8018-9650-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EKpARqqdewkC&pg=PR11}} *[[Michael Coppedge]] and [[John Gerring]], with [[David Altman]], [[Michael Bernhard]], [[Steven Fish]], [[Allen Hicken, Matthew Kroenig]], [[Staffan I. Lindberg]], [[Kelly McMann]], [[Pamela Paxton]], [[Holli A. Semetko]], [[Svend-Erik Skaaning]], [[Jeffrey Staton]] and [[Jan Teorell]]: ''[http://www.jstor.org/stable/41479651 Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach]'', pp. 247–267, [[Perspectives on Politics]] 9 (2), [[American Political Science Association]], [[Cambridge University Press]] 2011, doi:10.1017/S1537592711000880, ISSN 1537-5927, JSTOR 41479651, S2CID 11629045 *[[Seva Gunitsky]]: ''[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/23/how-do-you-measure-democracy/ How do you measure ‘democracy’?]'', [[Washington Post]], June 23, 2015 *[[Alexander Cooley]], Barnard College, Columbia University, [[Jack Snyder (political scientist)|Jack Snyder]], Columbia University, New York (Editors), [[Alexander Cooley]], [[Rawi Abdelal]], [[Mark Blyth]], [[Mlada Bukovansky]], [[Nehal Bhuta]], [[Seva Gunitsky]], [[Sam Schueth]], [[Jack Snyder (political scientist)|Jack Snyder]]: ''[https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/politics-international-relations/international-relations-and-international-organisations/ranking-world-grading-states-tool-global-governance Ranking the World – Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance]'', [[Cambridge University Press]], October 2016, ISBN: 9781107484122 (Paperback) / April 2015, ISBN: 9781107098138 (Hardback) :* Seva Gunitsky: ''Lost in the Gray Zone: Competing Measures of Democracy in the Former Soviet Republics.'' In ''Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance'', edited by Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder, p.112-150. Cambridge University Press, 2015, PDF on Seva Gunitsky's web at the [[Toronto University]]: http://individual.utoronto.ca/seva/dem_measures.pdf *{{cite book |last=Kahn |first=H. |title=On Measuring Democracy: Its Consequences and Concomitants: Conference Papers |publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2017 |isbn=978-1-351-50205-4 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NCExDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1}} *{{cite journal |last=Sönmez |first=Hakan |title=Democratic Backsliding or Stabilization? |journal=Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science |publisher=International Association for Political Science Students |volume=46 |date=2020-09-30 |issn=2414-6633 |doi=10.22151/politikon.46.3 |pages=54–78 |s2cid=224846248 |doi-access=free}} *{{cite journal |last1=Croissant |first1=Aurel |last2=Pelke |first2=Lars |title=Measuring Policy Performance, Democracy, and Governance Capacities: A conceptual and methodological assessment of the Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI) |journal=European Policy Analysis |publisher=Wiley |volume=8 |issue=2 |date=2022-04-25 |issn=2380-6567 |doi=10.1002/epa2.1141 |pages=136–159 |doi-access=free}} {{refend}}

== External links== *[https://ourworldindata.org/democracies-measurement Democracy data: how do researchers measure democracy?] – [[Our World in Data]] *[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/23/how-do-you-measure-democracy/ How do you measure ‘democracy’?] – [[The Washington Post]] *[https://theglobalobservatory.org/2016/09/catalogue-indices/ Catalogue of Indices 2016] – Global Observatory {{Politics country lists}}

[[Category:International rankings]] [[Category:Democracy]] [[Category:Social science indices]] [[Category:Types of democracy]]