Democracy Ranking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Democracy Ranking is an index compiled by the Association for Development and Advancement of the Democracy Award, an Austria-based non-partisan organization.[1][2] Democracy Ranking produces an annual global ranking of liberal democracies. The applied conceptual formula, which measures the quality of democracy, integrates freedom and other characteristics of the political system with the performance of non-political dimensions (gender, economy, knowledge, health, and environment). Democracy Ranking has emphasized a broader understanding of democracy, creating a conceptual link between politics and the output and performance of society. The Democracy Ranking has compared several-year intervals, delivering ranking results, which show how ranking positions and score levels have developed recently. Referring to that information, a Democracy Improvement Ranking has been regularly released.

Ranking 2016[edit]

Source:[3]

Rank Country Score Political System Economy Environment Gender Equality Health Knowledge Gender Comprehensive
1  Norway 87.1 99.2 84.7 59.9 84.7 84.3 61.4 92.1
2   Switzerland 86.7 92.2 80.5 82.6 81.2 88.2 73.5 85.6
3  Sweden 86.2 97.4 67.4 71.4 85.3 84.8 66.2 91.0
4  Finland 86.0 99.7 63.7 60.6 84.7 82.1 70.2 92.4
5  Denmark 85.1 94.3 69.5 78.1 82.8 81.4 67.6 87.3
6  Netherlands 83.3 93.6 69.7 59.3 81.9 84.9 68.7 86.5
7  New Zealand 81.4 92.2 63.3 66.3 82.8 81.3 59.1 86.8
8  Germany 81.3 90.2 71.1 60.5 78.0 85.3 67.2 83.9
9  Ireland 80.9 91.5 63.2 71.9 75.8 79.4 61.5 84.2
10  Australia 80.5 87.6 69.8 59.9 83.6 83.6 70.0 84.8
11  Belgium 80.3 90.5 61.5 55.5 81.3 84.0 68.0 85.1
12  Canada 79.9 89.7 68.3 56.3 82.0 82.0 62.0 84.9
13  Austria 79.9 85.5 69.1 66.4 80.2 86.6 69.1 82.0
14  United Kingdom 79.6 87.8 62.3 70.6 80.6 79.8 64.1 83.5
15  France 78.2 85.2 59.2 69.8 78.1 86.3 62.6 82.0
16  United States 76.5 84.2 71.5 49.1 78.7 83.0 62.3 80.5
17  Slovenia 75.9 83.7 54.6 62.4 79.9 79.3 64.5 82.6
18  Japan 75.5 79.8 57.1 63.8 82.0 87.7 65.8 78.8
19  Spain 75.3 83.1 42.4 75.2 76.8 85.0 58.1 80.8
20  Portugal 74.8 85.1 45.2 67.8 74.4 80.3 54.1 79.7
21  Uruguay 73.5 83.3 52.2 78.5 73.8 71.5 43.2 77.0
22  Lithuania 72.5 81.2 55.0 70.8 76.1 68.0 49.1 78.6
23  Estonia 72.5 84.8 60.5 31.7 79.7 72.3 56.5 81.2
24  Chile 72.0 81.4 51.2 67.3 76.9 76.8 41.4 78.4
25  Czech Republic 72.0 79.4 60.5 57.2 74.9 76.1 54.5 76.4
26  Israel 71.9 72.8 60.9 65.0 78.2 81.4 69.3 74.7
27  Poland 71.4 80.5 53.5 66.6 74.9 71.9 44.2 77.4
28  Italy 71.1 75.4 48.7 72.9 73.8 84.0 54.8 75.6
29  Hong Kong 70.7 60.9 77.2 91.4 80.0 100.0 54.1 71.5
30  Latvia 70.6 78.8 53.8 71.6 76.2 66.3 44.3 78.4
31  Costa Rica 70.2 80.2 44.7 79.0 70.1 73.1 34.5 74.9
32  South Korea 70.2 69.1 62.8 57.4 78.6 82.4 75.2 72.5
33  Cyprus 69.1 77.1 46.2 67.1 73.0 76.5 43.3 74.5
34  Slovak Republic 68.0 75.2 51.5 64.2 68.3 72.6 47.1 71.3
35  Croatia 67.0 73.6 39.1 72.2 69.9 73.1 47.8 72.7
36  Singapore 65.9 52.2 90.5 78.1 86.6 79.7 63.1 65.5
37  Greece 65.4 68.1 32.9 66.2 69.4 84.3 60.3 69.9
38  Panama 65.3 71.7 53.2 75.9 67.7 69.7 28.3 72.5
39  Mauritius 65.1 73.3 50.7 75.3 62.5 64.1 31.6 67.1
40  Romania 65.0 70.0 52.0 73.2 69.4 66.7 38.4 70.4
41  Bulgaria 64.4 70.4 49.7 58.5 71.7 70.4 41.5 72.7
42  Hungary 64.0 67.9 52.1 60.0 71.0 71.1 46.0 69.2
43  Argentina 63.9 67.4 46.4 66.5 73.7 68.5 47.4 73.5
44  Brazil 62.5 66.9 46.0 71.2 69.6 64.2 39.4 69.6
45  Trinidad and Tobago 61.1 71.3 60.1 38.9 68.0 55.2 32.0 70.8
46  Serbia 60.6 67.9 29.9 60.2 61.9 70.5 44.0 66.4
47  Peru 60.0 61.9 52.4 75.4 71.0 61.5 30.4 67.7
48  Jamaica 60.0 69.0 35.0 62.5 61.6 65.8 29.6 64.8
49  Mongolia 59.8 72.8 45.7 37.9 68.7 55.6 25.9 72.4
50  El Salvador 58.7 63.9 47.1 75.6 63.1 59.0 22.9 64.2
51  Ghana 57.8 71.6 41.9 76.4 53.1 31.9 16.9 62.2
52  Philippines 57.7 64.0 44.9 77.3 59.1 50.0 25.8 64.1
53  Colombia 57.3 58.0 46.3 79.0 65.9 61.8 30.3 63.7
54  Namibia 57.2 68.9 37.9 73.9 52.0 44.4 19.2 63.6
55  Albania 56.9 58.5 36.0 64.0 65.8 68.4 42.2 63.3
56  Tunisia 56.6 61.6 41.6 71.8 52.0 62.2 30.0 57.4
57  Georgia 56.4 58.7 40.9 68.9 65.8 66.3 28.8 61.9
58  Botswana 56.3 64.6 43.6 73.0 53.9 40.7 28.3 60.2
59  Dominican Republic 55.9 61.3 37.8 70.9 56.5 58.3 29.1 59.9
60  Mexico 55.7 55.6 50.0 71.1 65.1 67.1 25.8 62.3
61  Moldova 55.6 57.9 47.9 61.5 63.3 62.6 31.4 63.0
62  Ecuador 55.5 55.0 45.8 70.8 70.0 66.2 26.9 65.4
63  Bolivia 55.4 61.6 44.8 62.6 66.0 48.2 24.3 65.7
64  Senegal 55.3 66.1 37.3 67.7 54.7 43.9 18.9 61.8
65  India 54.8 63.6 46.6 68.6 50.9 45.9 18.1 57.5
66  Nicaragua 54.0 55.5 41.8 71.7 67.3 62.9 18.5 64.0
67  Timor-Leste 53.7 56.8 39.3 93.7 50.3 46.4 23.0 54.8
68  Indonesia 53.5 56.7 47.4 72.9 57.5 47.7 25.8 57.7
69  Paraguay 53.0 53.8 44.6 65.9 62.9 60.6 27.0 60.2
70  Ukraine 52.3 54.3 42.8 29.7 72.3 62.9 43.6 65.3
71  South Africa 52.2 70.5 26.9 48.6 35.9 30.6 27.8 57.1
72  Malawi 52.1 57.4 33.9 96.1 52.5 38.7 12.7 56.4
73  Benin 51.7 63.3 44.0 62.2 47.3 26.5 20.1 54.9
74  North Macedonia 51.3 53.4 27.1 66.7 53.8 67.3 31.4 54.6
75  Turkey 50.6 42.6 51.2 71.5 62.9 64.0 42.8 53.7
76  Malaysia 50.4 41.1 60.4 61.4 69.3 62.3 45.2 53.7
77  Papua New Guinea 49.9 54.7 42.1 75.6 54.5 36.0 17.4 54.4
78  Tanzania 49.5 53.7 41.5 68.7 61.3 40.3 15.1 60.8
79  Guatemala 49.0 48.2 50.8 66.1 58.1 57.1 17.0 54.3
80  Sri Lanka 49.0 42.7 46.8 83.8 63.1 62.1 20.5 55.3
81  Sierra Leone 48.3 56.5 40.8 93.9 44.1 12.8 9.5 51.1
82  Bangladesh 48.1 47.0 40.4 74.4 60.2 51.7 19.6 55.1
83  Madagascar 48.1 50.4 40.5 87.4 57.2 38.9 4.5 55.7
84  Kuwait 47.9 36.1 85.8 48.2 64.3 63.3 36.9 49.6
85  Honduras 47.7 44.4 42.6 67.7 58.0 61.9 25.2 52.6
86  Bosnia and Herzegovina 47.5 49.5 20.5 56.1 53.4 69.9 28.2 53.5
87  Liberia 47.4 50.3 39.6 91.2 44.9 33.6 13.0 48.1
88    Nepal 47.1 45.5 46.9 61.4 67.0 54.6 14.2 56.5
89  Lesotho 46.9 62.5 24.3 76.3 26.3 13.1 16.4 45.5
90  Kenya 46.4 49.4 35.9 71.9 53.4 34.7 20.6 53.5
91  Armenia 46.0 41.5 32.0 60.0 61.1 63.8 35.0 51.3
92  Zambia 45.5 50.1 32.3 73.4 57.3 31.0 10.4 53.5
93  Burkina Faso 45.3 46.2 41.8 91.8 47.3 25.5 15.9 46.0
94  Niger 43.2 49.4 40.0 72.1 33.3 32.5 7.2 39.6
95  Kyrgyzstan 43.0 39.1 37.3 51.0 64.7 56.3 24.9 53.1
96  Russian Federation 43.0 27.1 58.3 51.2 72.7 60.7 51.2 50.8
97  Lebanon 42.9 32.8 45.1 48.6 57.9 74.3 39.6 45.6
98  Morocco 42.5 35.1 43.0 69.5 48.7 59.0 29.6 40.6
99  Mozambique 42.5 53.5 23.3 65.2 35.4 20.9 12.2 47.3
100  Venezuela 42.2 31.4 33.3 60.6 68.2 62.9 39.4 52.9
101  Mali 39.5 36.8 38.5 99.2 33.8 23.8 16.1 33.7
102  Guinea 39.4 35.2 41.6 92.1 41.3 26.0 17.2 38.0
103  Togo 39.4 40.2 38.4 65.1 53.4 28.6 7.2 48.4
104  Nigeria 39.3 41.4 46.3 73.6 34.5 13.9 17.7 38.0
105  Haiti 39.0 36.4 36.3 67.6 57.0 39.3 7.9 46.5
106  Bahrain 38.6 18.2 71.5 50.7 64.4 66.9 41.9 39.6
107  China 38.3 21.9 47.7 53.9 67.9 66.0 38.3 45.5
108  Cote d'Ivoire 38.1 40.4 42.3 69.8 33.5 13.3 19.7 35.5
109  Egypt 35.7 24.8 32.7 70.6 45.3 55.5 29.2 34.2
110  Pakistan 34.9 32.4 41.5 61.5 34.6 38.8 10.7 31.7
111  Libya 29.5 15.8 32.2 57.1 45.0 58.2 23.4 29.6
112  Yemen 22.5 10.2 28.9 70.4 20.9 38.7 14.9 14.4

Vision[edit]

"The Democracy Ranking is interested in contributing to the global enhancement of the Quality of Democracy in a world-wide understanding and approach."[4]

Theory, conceptual formula and methodology[edit]

The Democracy Ranking initiative applies the following conceptual formula for defining democracy and measuring the quality of democracy:

Quality of Democracy = (freedom & other characteristics of the political system) & (performance of the non-political dimensions).[5]

This approach includes also the output of democracies. Democracy Ranking refers to countries (country-based democracies) with a population of one million or more and that are classified by Freedom House as "free" or at least as "partly free" (see also the Freedom House report). The Democracy Ranking makes explicit the "theoretical basis", which governs the theoretical self-understanding of the Democracy Ranking.[6]

The Democracy Ranking understands and measures democracies in a multi-dimensional framework and approach. By this, the Democracy Ranking contributes to a further development of measurement of democracy. According to the ranking, democracy consists of six dimensions (one political, five non-political), with different weights for the overall quality of democracy. Their weights are distributed accordingly:

  1. politics (or the political system) 50%;
  2. gender (gender equality in socioeconomic and educational terms) 10%;
  3. economy (or the economic system) 10%;
  4. knowledge (knowledge society, research and education) 10%;
  5. health (or the health system and health status) 10%;
  6. and environment (environmental sustainability) 10%.[7]

The theoretical basis of the Democracy Ranking encourages a broader approach for explaining and measuring democracy while covering and integrating non-political dimensions. This is enabled by an understanding that democracy represents not only a concept of the political system, but also a concept that extends to society and the context of society, and includes interfaces between politics, society, economy, and even the environment. Politics (policy) has or should have a responsibility for economic (socioeconomic) performance. Furthermore, there is also a need that democracy reflects the context of the (natural) environment.

Concepts of democracy turn out to be more demanding, the more they move from a mainly electoral democracy (emphasizing elections and political rights) to a liberal democracy (also encompassing civil liberties), and further extending to a liberal democracy of an advanced high quality. In that logic, the Democracy Ranking reflects and requires a "demanding type" of democracy.

Methodically, the Democracy Ranking does not create new indicators, but relies on already existing indicators that are being released regularly by renowned international and/or private non-profit organizations. The Democracy Ranking draws on available indicators according to a distinct conceptual formula and six-fold dimensional structure, thus providing a theoretically based conceptual design (a basic concept) of how to combine and aggregate these indicators. Depending on the source, the content of the indicators varies, extending from peer review assessment (for example, on freedom) to indicators that capture performance (e.g., socioeconomic behavior). The Democracy Ranking initiative acknowledges the work of organizations such as Freedom House, the World Bank, and also the United Nations Development Program (more specifically the Human Development Index).

Reflections on the Democracy Ranking[edit]

The work of the Democracy Ranking is being reflected in academic discourse[8][9][10][11][12][13][14] and in coverage by international media.[15][16]

Outcome: Democracy Ranking and Democracy Improvement Ranking scores[edit]

The Democracy Ranking analyzes several-year intervals, revealing relative ranking positions as well as changes of score levels over time. Typically, more than hundred countries are being compared in context of a specific Democracy Ranking. Based on ranking results and their shifts, a Democracy Improvement Ranking is being carried out, with a full result release. The Democracy Improvement Ranking places the emphasis on increases or decreases of the ranking scores of democracies. Individual annual rankings of the Democracy Ranking are also published in separate book volumes.[17]

See also[edit]

   

References[edit]

  1. ^ See "about us" of the Democracy Ranking
  2. ^ See contact details of the Democracy Ranking
  3. ^ http://democracyranking.org/ranking/2016/data/DR%202016-list%20of%20indicators-2017%2005%2026.xls
  4. ^ Vision and mission of the Democracy Ranking
  5. ^ Campbell, David F. J. (2008). The Basic Concept for the Democracy Ranking of the Quality of Democracy. Vienna: Democracy Ranking
  6. ^ See "theoretical basis" of the Democracy Ranking
  7. ^ Campbell, David F. J. / Miklós Sükösd (eds.) (2002). Feasibility Study for a Quality Ranking of Democracies. Vienna: Global Democracy Award
  8. ^ Romo, M. C. Felipe Reyes (2007). Transnacionalismo y participación política. Consideraciones teórico-metodológicas para el desarrollo de un sistema electoral con participación extraterritorial. Congresistas (No. 149-153)
  9. ^ "Campbell, David F. J. / Thorsten D. Barth (2009). Wie können Demokratie und Demokratiequalität gemessen werden? Modelle, Demokratie-Indices und Länderbeispiele im globalen Vergleich. (How Can Democracy and the Quality of Democracy Be Measured? Models, Democracy Indices and Country-Based Case Studies in Global Comparison.) SWS-Rundschau 49 (2), 208-233" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-05-23. Retrieved 2009-12-09.
  10. ^ Jochem, Sven (2010). Wandel und Zukunftsaussichten des schwedisch-sozialdemokratischen Modells. (Change and Future Prospects of the Swedish Social Democratic Model.) Leviathan 38 (2), 227-249
  11. ^ Barth, Thorsten D. (2010). Konzeption, Messung und Rating der Demokratiequalität. Brasilien, Südafrika, Australien und die Russische Föderation 1997-2006. (Conception, Measurement and Rating of the Quality of Democracy. Brazil, South Africa, Australia, and the Russian Federation, 1997-2006.) Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller
  12. ^ Rosema, Martin / Bas Denters / Kees Arts (eds.) (2011). How Democracy Works. Political Representation and Policy Congruence in Modern Societies. Amsterdam: Pallas Publications (Amsterdam University Press)
  13. ^ Hankiovsky, Olena / Anastasiya Salnykova (eds.) (2012). Gender, Politics and Society in Ukraine. Toronto: University of Toronto Press
  14. ^ Vatter, Adrian (2014). Das politische System der Schweiz. Baden-Baden: Nomos (UTB)
  15. ^ "Globale Demokratie-Hitliste: Wer steigt auf und wer ab" (2013, December 12) by Wieland Schneider, Die Presse (Austria)
  16. ^ "Only democracy can clean up the planet. Save the ballot box and save the world" (2009, November 20), by Neil Reynolds, The Globe and Mail (Canada)
  17. ^ Campbell, David F. J. / Thorsten D. Barth / Paul Pölzlbauer / Georg Pölzlbauer (2012). Democracy Ranking (Edition 2012): The Quality of Democracy in the World. Vienna: Democracy Ranking (Books on Demand)

External links[edit]

Official links[edit]