Democracy Index

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy index map for 2016.[1]
Bluer colors represent more democratic countries.

The Democracy Index is an index compiled by the UK-based Economist Intelligence Unit that measures the state of democracy in 167 countries, of which 166 are sovereign states and 165 are UN member states. The index was first produced in 2006, with updates for 2008, 2010 and the following years since then. The index is based on 60 indicators grouped in five different categories measuring pluralism, civil liberties, and political culture. In addition to a numeric score and a ranking, the index categorizes countries as one of four regime types: full democracies, flawed democracies, hybrid regimes and authoritarian regimes.

Method[edit]

As described in the report,[2] the democracy index is a weighted average based on the answers of 60 questions, each one with either two or three permitted alternative answers. Most answers are "experts' assessments"; the report does not indicate what kinds of experts, nor their number, nor whether the experts are employees of the Economist Intelligence Unit or independent scholars, nor the nationalities of the experts. Some answers are provided by public-opinion surveys from the respective countries. In the case of countries for which survey results are missing, survey results for similar countries and expert assessments are used in order to fill in gaps.

The questions are distributed in the five categories: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, functioning of government, political participation, and political culture. Each answer is translated to a mark, either 0 or 1, or for the three-answer alternative questions, 0.5. With the exceptions mentioned below, the sums are added within each category, multiplied by ten, and divided by the total number of questions within the category. There are a few modifying dependencies, which are explained much more precisely than the main rule procedures. In a few cases, an answer yielding zero for one question voids another question; e.g., if the elections for the national legislature and head of government are not considered free (question 1), then the next question, "Are elections... fair?" is not considered, but automatically marked zero. Likewise, there are a few questions considered so important that a low score on them yields a penalty on the total score sum for their respective categories, namely:

  1. "Whether national elections are free and fair";
  2. "The security of voters";
  3. "The influence of foreign powers on government";
  4. "The capability of the civil servants to implement policies".

The four category indices, which are listed in the report, are then averaged to find the democracy index for a given country. Finally, the democracy index, rounded to one decimal, decides the regime type classification of the country.

The report discusses other indices of democracy, as defined e.g. by Freedom House, and argues for some of the choices made by the team from the Economist Intelligence Unit. In this comparison, a higher emphasis has been put on the public opinion and attitudes, as measured by surveys, but on the other hand, economic living standard has not been weighted as one criterion of democracy (as seemingly some other investigators[who?] have done).[3][4]

The report is widely cited in the international press as well as in peer reviewed academic journals.[5]

Classification definitions[edit]

Full democracies are nations where civil liberties and basic political freedoms are not only respected, but also reinforced by a political culture conducive to the thriving of democratic principles. These nations have a valid system of governmental checks and balances, independent judiciary whose decisions are enforced, governments which function adequately, and media which is diverse and independent. These nations have only limited problems in democratic functioning.[6]

Flawed democracies are nations where elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honored but may have issues (e.g. media freedom infringement). Nonetheless, these nations have significant faults in other democratic aspects, including underdeveloped political culture, low levels of participation in politics, and issues in the functioning of governance.[6]

Hybrid regimes are nations where consequential irregularities exist in elections regularly preventing them from being fair and free. These nations commonly have governments which apply pressure on political opponents, non independent judiciaries, widespread corruption, harassment and pressure placed on the media, anemic rule of law, and more pronounced faults than flawed democracies in the realms of underdeveloped political culture, low levels of participation in politics, and issues in the functioning of governance.[6]

Authoritarian regimes are nations where political pluralism has vanished or is extremely limited. These nations are often absolute dictatorships, may have some conventional institutions of democracy- but with meager significance, infringements and abuses of civil liberties are commonplace, elections- if they take place- are not fair and free, the media is often state-owned or controlled by groups associated with the ruling regime, the judiciary is not independent, and the presence of omnipresent censorship and suppression of governmental criticism.[6]

Changes from 2010 onwards[edit]

According to the issue of the index for 2012, Norway scored a total of 9.93 on a scale from zero to ten, keeping the first-place position it has held since 2010, when it replaced Sweden as the highest-ranked country in the index. North Korea scored the lowest with 1.08, remaining at the bottom in 167th place, the same as in 2010 and 2011.[2]

There was no significant improvement or regression in democracy between 2011 and 2012. In 2012 the index score stayed the same for 73 out of 167 countries, improved for 54 countries, and declined for 40. Libya experienced the biggest increase of any country in its score in 2012. Average regional scores in 2012 were very similar to scores in 2011. An exception is the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) where the average score increased by more than a tenth of a point, from 3.62 to 3.73 and three countries moved from authoritarian to hybrid regimes (Egypt, Libya, Morocco).[2]

The Democracy Index for 2011 highlighted the impact of the Arab Spring and the greater effects it might have, as well as the impact of the global financial crisis in 2007–08 on politics throughout most of Europe. The Democracy Index score was lower in 2011 than in 2010 in 48 countries out of the 167 that are covered. It was higher in 41 ranked countries, and it stayed the same in 78.[7]

In nine countries there was a change in regime type between 2010 and 2011; in four of these there was regression. Russia was downgraded from a hybrid regime to an authoritarian regime, which the report attributes to concerns over the December 4 legislative election and Vladimir Putin's decision to run again in the 2012 presidential election. Portugal was also downgraded to the flawed democracy category, attributed to the effects of the global financial crisis. Tunisia, Mauritania, Egypt, and Niger were all upgraded to hybrid regimes, and Zambia moved up to the flawed democracy category.[7]

In 2016, the United States was downgraded from a full democracy to a flawed democracy; its score, which had been experiencing a persistent downward trend, crossed the threshold from 8.05 in 2015 to 7.98 in 2016. The report states that this was not due to the election of Donald Trump, but was caused by the same factors that led to his election.[8]

Democracy index by regime type[edit]

The following table gives the number and percentage of countries and the percentage of the world population for each regime type in 2016:[1]

Type of regime Scores (s) Number of
countries		 Percentage
of countries		 Percentage of
world population
Full democracies 8 ≤ s ≤ 10 19 11.4 4.5
Flawed democracies 6 ≤ s < 8 57 34.1 44.8
Hybrid regimes 4 ≤ s < 6 40 24.0 18.0
Authoritarian regimes 0 ≤ s < 4 51 30.5 32.7

World population refers to the total population of the 167 countries covered by the Index. Since this excludes only micro-states, this is nearly equal to the entire estimated world population.

Democracy index by region[edit]

The following table gives the index average by world region, and the number of covered countries in 2016. Note that some regional groups (e.g., the 'Eastern Europe') are very heterogeneous and composed of full democracies as well as authoritarian regimes:

Rank Region Countries 2006[4] 2008[9] 2010[3] 2011[7] 2012[2] 2013[10] 2014[11] 2015[6] 2016[1]
1 Northern America 2 8.64 8.64 8.63 8.59 8.59 8.59 8.59 8.56 8.56
2 Western Europe 21 8.60 8.61 8.45 8.40 8.44 8.41 8.41 8.42 8.40
3 Latin America and the Caribbean 24 6.37 6.43 6.37 6.35 6.36 6.38 6.36 6.37 6.33
4 Asia and Australasia 28 5.44 5.58 5.53 5.51 5.56 5.61 5.70 5.74 5.74
5 Central and Eastern Europe 28 5.76 5.67 5.55 5.50 5.51 5.53 5.58 5.55 5.43
6 Sub-Saharan Africa 44 4.24 4.28 4.23 4.32 4.33 4.36 4.34 4.38 4.37
7 Middle East and North Africa 20 3.54 3.48 3.52 3.62 3.73 3.68 3.65 3.58 3.56
  World 167 5.52 5.55 5.46 5.49 5.52 5.53 5.55 5.55 5.52

Democracy index by country (2016)[edit]

Listing by country is available on the Economist website;[1] for by-country tables in Wikipedia using similar measures, see List of freedom indices.

Democracy Index 2016
Rank Country Score Electoral process
and pluralism		 Functioning of
government		 Political
participation		 Political
culture		 Civil
liberties		 Category
1  Norway 9.93 10.00 9.64 10.00 10.00 10.00 Full democracy
2  Iceland 9.50 10.00 8.93 8.89 10.00 9.71 Full democracy
3  Sweden 9.39 9.58 9.64 8.33 10.00 9.41 Full democracy
4  New Zealand 9.26 10.00 9.29 8.89 8.13 10.00 Full democracy
5  Denmark 9.20 9.58 9.29 8.33 9.38 9.41 Full democracy
6  Canada 9.15 9.58 9.64 7.78 8.75 10.00 Full democracy
7  Ireland 9.15 9.58 7.86 8.33 10.00 10.00 Full democracy
8   Switzerland 9.09 9.58 9.29 7.78 9.38 9.41 Full democracy
9  Finland 9.03 10.00 8.93 7.78 8.75 9.71 Full democracy
10  Australia 9.01 9.58 8.93 7.78 8.75 10.00 Full democracy
11  Luxembourg 8.81 10.00 8.93 6.67 8.75 9.71 Full democracy
12  Netherlands 8.80 9.58 8.57 8.33 8.13 9.41 Full democracy
13  Germany 8.63 9.58 8.57 7.78 7.50 9.71 Full democracy
14  Austria 8.41 9.58 7.86 8.33 6.88 9.41 Full democracy
15  Malta 8.39 9.17 8.21 6.11 8.75 9.71 Full democracy
16  United Kingdom 8.36 9.58 7.14 7.22 8.75 9.12 Full democracy
17  Spain 8.30 9.58 7.14 7.22 8.13 9.41 Full democracy
18  Mauritius 8.28 9.17 8.21 5.56 8.75 9.71 Full democracy
19  Uruguay 8.17 10.00 8.93 4.44 7.50 10.00 Full democracy
20  Japan 7.99 8.75 8.21 6.67 7.50 8.82 Flawed democracy
21  United States 7.98 9.17 7.14 7.22 8.13 8.24 Flawed democracy
21  Italy 7.98 9.58 6.43 7.22 8.13 8.53 Flawed democracy
23  Cape Verde 7.94 9.17 7.86 6.67 6.88 9.12 Flawed democracy
24  France 7.92 9.58 7.14 7.78 6.25 8.82 Flawed democracy
24  South Korea 7.92 9.17 7.50 7.72 7.50 8.24 Flawed democracy
26  Costa Rica 7.88 9.58 7.14 6.11 6.88 9.71 Flawed democracy
27  Botswana 7.87 9.17 7.14 6.11 7.50 9.41 Flawed democracy
28  Portugal 7.86 9.58 6.79 6.67 6.88 9.41 Flawed democracy
29  Israel 7.85 9.17 7.50 8.89 7.50 6.18 Flawed democracy
Rank Country Score Electoral process
and pluralism		 Functioning of
government		 Political
participation		 Political
culture		 Civil
liberties		 Category
29  Estonia 7.85 9.58 7.86 6.11 6.88 8.82 Flawed democracy
31  Czech Republic 7.82 9.58 7.14 6.67 6.88 8.82 Flawed democracy
32  India 7.81 9.58 7.50 7.22 5.63 9.12 Flawed democracy
33  Taiwan 7.79 9.58 8.21 6.11 5.63 9.41 Flawed democracy
34  Chile 7.78 9.58 8.57 4.44 6.88 9.41 Flawed democracy
35  Belgium 7.77 9.58 8.57 5.00 6.88 8.82 Flawed democracy
36  Cyprus 7.65 9.17 6.43 6.67 6.88 9.12 Flawed democracy
37  Slovenia 7.51 9.58 7.14 6.67 5.63 8.53 Flawed democracy
38  Lithuania 7.47 9.58 5.71 6.11 6.25 9.71 Flawed democracy
39  South Africa 7.41 7.92 7.86 8.33 5.00 7.94 Flawed democracy
40  Jamaica 7.39 9.17 6.79 5.00 6.88 9.12 Flawed democracy
41  Latvia 7.31 9.58 5.71 5.56 6.88 8.82 Flawed democracy
42  Slovakia 7.29 9.58 7.14 5.56 5.63 8.53 Flawed democracy
43  Timor-Leste 7.24 8.67 7.14 5.56 6.88 7.94 Flawed democracy
44  Greece 7.23 9.58 5.36 6.11 6.25 8.82 Flawed democracy
45  Panama 7.13 9.58 6.43 6.11 5.00 8.82 Flawed democracy
46  Trinidad and Tobago 7.10 9.58 7.14 5.56 5.00 8.24 Flawed democracy
47  Bulgaria 7.01 9.17 6.07 7.22 4.38 8.24 Flawed democracy
48  Indonesia 6.97 7.75 7.14 6.67 6.25 7.06 Flawed democracy
49  Argentina 6.96 9.17 5.00 6.11 6.88 7.65 Flawed democracy
50  Philippines 6.94 9.17 5.71 7.22 4.38 8.24 Flawed democracy
51  Brazil 6.90 9.58 6.79 5.56 3.75 8.82 Flawed democracy
52  Poland 6.83 9.17 5.71 6.67 4.38 8.24 Flawed democracy
53  Suriname 6.77 9.17 6.43 5.00 5.00 8.24 Flawed democracy
54  Croatia 6.75 9.17 6.07 5.56 5.00 7.94 Flawed democracy
54  Ghana 6.75 8.33 5.71 6.11 6.25 7.35 Flawed democracy
56  Hungary 6.72 9.17 6.07 4.44 6.88 7.06 Flawed democracy
57  Dominican Republic 6.67 8.75 5.71 5.00 6.25 7.65 Flawed democracy
57  Colombia 6.67 9.17 7.14 4.44 4.38 8.24 Flawed democracy
59  Peru 6.65 9.17 5.36 6.11 4.38 8.24 Flawed democracy
Rank Country Score Electoral process
and pluralism		 Functioning of
government		 Political
participation		 Political
culture		 Civil
liberties		 Category
60  El Salvador 6.64 9.17 6.07 4.44 5.00 8.53 Flawed democracy
61  Romania 6.62 9.17 5.71 5.00 5.00 8.24 Flawed democracy
61  Mongolia 6.62 9.17 5.71 5.00 5.00 8.24 Flawed democracy
63  Lesotho 6.59 8.25 5.36 6.67 5.63 7.06 Flawed democracy
64  Serbia 6.57 8.75 5.36 6.67 5.00 7.06 Flawed democracy
65  Malaysia 6.54 6.92 7.86 6.11 6.25 5.59 Flawed democracy
66  Sri Lanka 6.48 7.83 6.79 5.00 6.88 5.88 Flawed democracy
67  Mexico 6.47 7.92 6.07 7.22 4.38 6.76 Flawed democracy
68  Hong Kong 6.42 3.92 5.71 5.56 7.50 9.41 Flawed democracy
69  Tunisia 6.40 6.00 6.07 7.78 6.25 5.58 Flawed democracy
70  Singapore 6.38 4.33 7.86 6.11 6.25 7.35 Flawed democracy
71  Namibia 6.31 5.67 5.36 6.67 5.63 8.24 Flawed democracy
72  Paraguay 6.27 8.33 5.71 5.00 4.38 7.94 Flawed democracy
73  Guyana 6.25 8.33 5.36 6.11 4.38 7.06 Flawed democracy
74  Senegal 6.21 7.92 5.36 4.44 6.25 7.06 Flawed democracy
75  Papua New Guinea 6.03 6.92 6.07 3.89 5.63 7.65 Flawed democracy
76  Moldova 6.01 7.92 4.29 6.11 4.38 7.35 Flawed democracy
77  Zambia 5.99 7.08 5.36 3.89 6.88 6.76 Hybrid regime
78  Georgia 5.93 8.67 4.29 6.11 5.00 5.59 Hybrid regime
79  Honduras 5.92 9.17 5.71 3.89 4.38 6.47 Hybrid regime
79  Guatemala 5.92 7.92 6.07 3.89 4.38 7.35 Hybrid regime
81  Albania 5.91 7.00 4.36 5.56 5.00 7.65 Hybrid regime
82  Ecuador 5.81 8.25 4.64 5.00 4.38 6.76 Hybrid regime
83  Tanzania 5.76 7.00 5.00 5.56 6.25 5.00 Hybrid regime
84  Bangladesh 5.73 7.42 5.07 5.00 4.38 6.76 Hybrid regime
85  Montenegro 5.72 7.08 5.36 5.00 4.38 6.76 Hybrid regime
86  Ukraine 5.70 5.83 3.93 6.67 5.00 7.06 Hybrid regime
86  Mali 5.70 7.42 3.93 4.44 6.25 6.47 Hybrid regime
88  Benin 5.67 6.50 5.36 5.00 5.63 5.88 Hybrid regime
89  Fiji 5.64 4.58 5.71 6.67 5.63 5.59 Hybrid regime
Rank Country Score Electoral process
and pluralism		 Functioning of
government		 Political
participation		 Political
culture		 Civil
liberties		 Category
90  Bolivia 5.63 7.00 5.36 5.00 3.75 7.06 Hybrid regime
91  Malawi 5.55 6.58 4.29 4.44 6.25 6.18 Hybrid regime
92  Kenya 5.33 4.33 5.00 6.67 5.63 5.00 Hybrid regime
93  Liberia 5.31 7.83 2.57 5.56 5.00 5.59 Hybrid regime
94  Uganda 5.26 5.25 3.57 4.44 6.88 6.18 Hybrid regime
95  Macedonia 5.23 6.92 3.21 6.11 3.75 6.18 Hybrid regime
96  Madagascar 5.07 5.92 3.57 5.56 5.63 4.71 Hybrid regime
97  Turkey 5.04 5.83 6.07 5.00 5.63 2.65 Hybrid regime
98  Kyrgyzstan 4.93 7.42 2.93 5.56 3.75 5.00 Hybrid regime
98  Bhutan 4.93 8.33 5.36 2.78 4.38 3.82 Hybrid regime
100  Thailand 4.92 4.50 3.93 5.00 5.00 6.18 Hybrid regime
101  Bosnia and Herzegovina 4.87 6.50 2.93 5.00 3.75 6.18 Hybrid regime
102  Lebanon 4.86 4.42 2.14 7.78 4.38 5.59 Hybrid regime
102    Nepal 4.86 4.33 4.29 4.44 5.63 5.59 Hybrid regime
104  Nicaragua 4.81 4.50 3.29 3.89 5.63 6.76 Hybrid regime
105  Morocco 4.77 4.75 4.64 4.44 5.63 4.41 Hybrid regime
106  Burkina Faso 4.70 4.42 4.29 4.44 5.63 4.71 Hybrid regime
107  Venezuela 4.68 5.67 2.50 5.56 4.38 5.29 Hybrid regime
108  Sierra Leone 4.55 6.58 1.86 2.78 6.25 5.29 Hybrid regime
109  Nigeria 4.50 6.08 4.29 3.33 4.38 4.41 Hybrid regime
110  Palestine 4.49 4.33 2.14 7.78 4.38 3.82 Hybrid regime
111  Pakistan 4.33 6.00 5.36 2.78 2.50 5.00 Hybrid regime
112  Cambodia 4.27 3.17 5.71 3.33 5.00 4.12 Hybrid regime
113  Myanmar 4.20 3.17 3.57 4.44 6.88 2.94 Hybrid regime
114  Iraq 4.08 4.33 0.07 7.22 4.38 4.41 Hybrid regime
115  Mozambique 4.02 4.42 2.14 5.00 5.00 3.53 Hybrid regime
115  Haiti 4.02 5.17 2.21 2.22 3.75 6.76 Hybrid regime
117  Mauritania 3.96 3.00 4.29 5.00 3.13 4.41 Authoritarian
117  Jordan 3.96 4.00 4.29 3.89 4.38 3.24 Authoritarian
117  Niger 3.96 4.75 2.21 2.22 3.75 6.76 Authoritarian
Rank Country Score Electoral process
and pluralism		 Functioning of
government		 Political
participation		 Political
culture		 Civil
liberties		 Category
120  Armenia 3.88 4.33 2.86 4.44 1.88 5.88 Authoritarian
121  Kuwait 3.85 3.17 4.29 3.89 4.38 3.53 Authoritarian
122  Ivory Coast 3.81 3.42 2.86 3.33 5.63 3.82 Authoritarian
123  Gabon 3.74 2.58 2.21 4.44 5.63 3.82 Authoritarian
124  Comoros 3.71 4.33 2.21 4.44 3.75 3.82 Authoritarian
125  Ethiopia 3.60 0.00 3.57 5.56 5.63 3.24 Authoritarian
126  Algeria 3.56 2.58 2.21 3.89 5.00 4.12 Authoritarian
127  Belarus 3.54 1.33 3.57 3.89 6.25 2.65 Authoritarian
128  Cameroon 3.46 2.00 3.21 3.89 4.38 3.82 Authoritarian
128  Cuba 3.46 1.75 4.64 3.89 4.38 2.65 Authoritarian
130  Angola 3.40 0.92 3.21 5.56 4.38 2.94 Authoritarian
131  Vietnam 3.38 0.00 3.21 3.89 6.88 2.94 Authoritarian
132  Togo 3.32 3.58 1.14 2.78 5.00 4.12 Authoritarian
133  Egypt 3.31 2.58 3.93 3.33 3.75 2.94 Authoritarian
134  Russia 3.24 2.67 2.50 5.00 2.50 3.53 Authoritarian
135  Qatar 3.18 0.00 3.93 2.22 5.63 4.12 Authoritarian
136  China 3.14 0.00 4.64 3.33 6.25 1.47 Authoritarian
136  Guinea 3.14 3.50 0.43 4.44 4.38 2.94 Authoritarian
138  Rwanda 3.07 0.83 5.00 2.22 4.38 2.94 Authoritarian
139  Kazakhstan 3.06 0.50 2.14 4.44 4.38 3.82 Authoritarian
140  Zimbabwe 3.05 0.50 2.00 3.89 5.63 3.24 Authoritarian
141  Oman 3.04 0.00 3.93 2.78 4.38 4.12 Authoritarian
142  Swaziland 3.03 0.92 2.86 2.22 5.63 3.53 Authoritarian
143  Republic of the Congo 2.91 1.67 2.86 3.33 3.75 2.94 Authoritarian
143  Gambia 2.91 1.75 3.21 2.22 5.00 2.35 Authoritarian
145  Djibouti 2.83 0.42 2.14 3.33 5.63 2.65 Authoritarian
146  Bahrain 2.79 1.25 3.21 2.78 4.38 2.35 Authoritarian
147  United Arab Emirates 2.75 0.00 3.57 2.22 5.00 2.94 Authoritarian
148  Azerbaijan 2.65 0.50 2.14 3.33 3.75 3.53 Authoritarian
149  Afghanistan 2.55 2.50 1.14 2.78 2.50 3.82 Authoritarian
Rank Country Score Electoral process
and pluralism		 Functioning of
government		 Political
participation		 Political
culture		 Civil
liberties		 Category
150  Burundi 2.40 0.33 0.79 3.89 5.00 2.65 Authoritarian
151  Sudan 2.37 0.00 1.79 3.89 5.00 1.18 Authoritarian
151  Eritrea 2.37 0.00 2.14 1.67 6.88 1.18 Authoritarian
151  Laos 2.37 0.83 2.86 1.67 5.00 1.47 Authoritarian
154  Iran 2.34 0.00 3.21 3.89 3.13 1.47 Authoritarian
155  Libya 2.25 1.00 0.00 1.67 5.63 2.94 Authoritarian
156  Yemen 2.07 0.00 0.00 4.44 5.00 0.88 Authoritarian
157  Guinea-Bissau 1.98 1.67 0.00 2.78 3.13 2.35 Authoritarian
158  Uzbekistan 1.95 0.08 1.86 2.22 5.00 0.59 Authoritarian
159  Democratic Republic of the Congo 1.93 0.92 0.71 2.78 4.38 0.88 Authoritarian
159  Saudi Arabia 1.93 0.00 2.86 2.22 3.13 1.47 Authoritarian
161  Tajikistan 1.89 0.58 0.07 1.67 6.25 0.88 Authoritarian
162  Turkmenistan 1.83 0.00 0.79 2.78 5.00 0.59 Authoritarian
163  Equatorial Guinea 1.70 0.00 0.43 2.22 4.38 1.47 Authoritarian
164  Central African Republic 1.61 1.75 0.36 1.11 2.50 2.35 Authoritarian
165  Chad 1.50 0.00 0.00 1.11 3.75 2.65 Authoritarian
166  Syria 1.43 0.00 0.00 2.78 4.38 0.00 Authoritarian
167  North Korea 1.08 0.00 2.50 1.67 1.25 0.00 Authoritarian

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d "Democracy Index 2016: Revenge of the “deplorables”" (PDF). eiu.com. The Economist Intelligence Unit. 25 January 2017. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  2. ^ a b c d "Democracy index 2012: Democracy at a standstill" (PDF). Economist Intelligence Unit. 14 March 2013. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  3. ^ a b "Democracy Index 2010: Democracy in retreat" (PDF). Economist Intelligence Unit. 6 December 2010. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  4. ^ a b Laza Kekic, director, country forecasting services (15 November 2006). "The Economist Intelligence Unit’s index of democracy" (PDF). The World in 2007. Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  5. ^ "More State than Nation: Lukashenko's Belarus | JIA SIPA". Journal of International Affairs. 65 (1): 93–113. 1 December 2011. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  6. ^ a b c d e "Democracy Index 2015: Democracy in an age of anxiety" (PDF). The Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  7. ^ a b c "Democracy index 2011: Democracy under stress"Free registration required. Economist Intelligence Unit. 14 December 2011. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  8. ^ "Declining trust in government is denting democracy". The Economist. 25 January 2017. 
  9. ^ "Index of Democracy 2008" (PDF). Economist Intelligence Unit. 21 October 2008. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  10. ^ "Democracy Index 2013: Democracy in limbo"Free registration required. The Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 
  11. ^ "Democracy Index 2014:Democracy and its discontents" (PDF). The Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved 26 January 2017. 

External links[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Democracy_Index&oldid=784543589"