Statistics on Democracy

According to the latest report by Freedom House, 2009 marked the fourth consecutive year in which democracy suffered a decline—the longest consecutive period of setbacks in the nearly 40-year history of the report. These declines were most pronounced in Sub-Saharan Africa, although they also occurred in most other regions of the world.

Here’s a somewhat longer series:

(source)

Expressed not in share of countries but in number of countries gives the following:

(source)

And here’s how this has evolved from 1972 till 2005 (red = not free, green = free):

(source)

Don’t forget that there are some problems with democracy measurement. On the condition that definition of democracy remains constant over time, the trends given here (how many more/less democracies are there?) may provide some useful information. The levels, however (how many democracies are there) heavily depend on what you call a democracy. (I dealt with this issue here). Freedom House has been criticized for its methods, but the same can be said for any democracy index.

Freedom House is indeed just one resource. There are other interesting measures of democracy. In particular, there’s the Global Integrity Report. Some charts are available here.

This sample chart for instance assesses voting and elections integrity as well as regulations governing the financing of political parties and candidates:

There is also the Economist Intelligence Unit Index of Democracy which studies five general categories:

• free and fair election process
• civil liberties
• functioning of government
• political participation
• political culture

Countries are ranked on a scale between 0 and 10, with 10 being the most democratic one (in the 2007 ranking, Sweden was the most democratic with a score of 9.88):

Here’s the 2010 EIU ranking of countries in Africa:

(source)

Update: here’s the 2011 version, and you can clearly see some progress:

(source)

Democracy south of the Sahara may be sloppy and haphazard, but electoral contests and term limits are increasingly accepted as fixed rules, to be flouted at a would-be ruler’s peril, rather than distant ideals. Today only one African state, Eritrea, holds no elections. (source)

The following map shows the countries of the world that self-identify as a democracy in green, and the tiny minority that doesn’t in red (Vatican, Saudi Arabia, Myanmar, Fiji, Tonga and Brunei):

(source, click image to enlarge)

Now, compare this to the latest Freedom House scores, which helpfully but completely coincidentally have the same color codes:

(source)

This raises two related questions: why is there a difference between self-identification and reality, and why do countries think it is important to claim that they are democracies, even when the facts clearly belie this claim and the governments making the claim probably know better? Self-delusion can’t be excluded. Some governments probably have an excessively optimistic view of their country’s institutions and achievements. Some may have an excessively minimalistic view of democracy (but then again, Freedom House makes the same mistake…). Some may believe to have the support of the people and think that this is a sufficient condition. Some may hope that claiming the support of the people will allow them to get away with more on the international scene, or to get some beneficial treatment from other countries. And some may hope for a self-fulfilling prophecy effect.

What we can take away from this is that the idea of democracy seems to be very powerful. I just wish it was more than merely the idea that is powerful.