Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) Democracy Index
(Redirected from Economist Intelligence (EIU) Democracy Index)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
An Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) Democracy Index is an democracy measure published by Economist Intelligence Unit.
- AKA: EIU Democracy Index.
- Context:
- It can be composed of: ..., a Democratic Political Culture Measure (for political culture), ...
- It can delineate between Full democracy, Flawed Democracy, Hybrid Regime, and Authoritarian Regime.
- …
- Example(s):
- See: State of Democracy, Sovereign State, Member States of The United Nations, Pluralism (Political Philosophy), Civil Liberties.
References
2020
- (Wikipedia, 2020) ⇒ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index Retrieved:2020-2-6.
- The Democracy Index is an index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), a UK-based company. It intends to measure the state of democracy in 167 countries, of which 166 are sovereign states and 164 are UN member states.
The index was first published in 2006, with updates for 2008, 2010 and later years. 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 categorises each country in one of four regime types: full democracies, flawed democracies, hybrid regimes and authoritarian regimes.
- The Democracy Index is an index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), a UK-based company. It intends to measure the state of democracy in 167 countries, of which 166 are sovereign states and 164 are UN member states.
2019
- https://eiu.com/topic/democracy-index
- QUOTE: ... The index values are used to place countries within one of four types of regime:
- . Full democracies: scores greater than 8
- . Flawed democracies: scores greater than 6, and less than or equal to 8
- . Hybrid regimes: scores greater than 4, and less than or equal to 6
- . Authoritarian regimes: scores less than or equal to 4
- Full democracies: Countries in which not only basic political freedoms and civil liberties are respected, but which also tend to be underpinned by a political culture conducive to the flourishing of democracy. The functioning of government is satisfactory. Media are independent and diverse. There is an effective system of checks and balances. The judiciary is independent and judicial decisions are enforced. There are only limited problems in the functioning of democracies.
- Flawed democracies: These countries also have free and fair elections and, even if there are problems (such as infringements on media freedom), basic civil liberties are respected. However, there are significant weaknesses in other aspects of democracy, including problems in governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation.
- Hybrid regimes: Elections have substantial irregularities that often prevent them from being both free and fair. Government pressure on opposition parties and candidates may be common. Serious weaknesses are more prevalent than in flawed democracies — in political culture, functioning of government and political participation. Corruption tends to be widespread and the rule of law is weak. Civil society is weak. Typically, there is harassment of and pressure on journalists, and the judiciary is not independent.
- Authoritarian regimes: In these states, state political pluralism is absent or heavily circumscribed. Many countries in this category are outright dictatorships. Some formal institutions of democracy may exist, but these have little substance. Elections, if they do occur, are not free and fair. There is disregard for abuses and infringements of civil liberties. Media are typically state-owned or controlled by groups connected to the ruling regime. There is repression of criticism of the government and pervasive censorship. There is no independent judiciary.
- QUOTE: ... The index values are used to place countries within one of four types of regime:
