Democracy-Dictatorship Index

Democracies and dictatorships in 1988[1]
Democracies and dictatorships in 2008[1]

Democracy-Dictatorship (DD)[1], index of democracy and dictatorship[2] or simply the DD index[3] or the DD datasets refers to the binary measure of democracy and dictatorship first proposed by Adam Przeworski et al. (2010), and further developed and maintained by Cheibub, Gandhi, and Vreeland (2009).[4]

Based on the regime binary classification idea proposed by Alvarez in 1996[5], and the Democracy and Development (or DD measure, ACLP datatset) proposed by Przeworski et al. (2010), Cheibub, Gandhi, and Vreeland developed a six-fold regime classification scheme, resulting what the authors called as the DD datasets.[1]:68

The DD dataset covers the annual data points of 199 countries from 1946 (or date of independence) to 2008.[1]:68 The figures at the left show the results in 1998 and 2008.

Six-fold regime classification scheme and its rules

The DD index first classifies the regimes into two types: democracies and dictatorships. For democracies, it categorizes them into three types: parliamentary, semi-presidential and presidential democracies. For dictatorships, monarchic, military and civilian dictatorship.[1]

Based on a “minimalist” theory of democracy, the index relies on rules regarding the existence of competitive elections.[1][3] Resorting to democratic concepts by Karl Popper and Joseph Schumpeter, Przeworkski defended the minimalist approach, citing Popper that "the only system in which citizens can get rid of governments without bloodshed."[6]

Four rules

For a regime to be considered as a democracy by the DD scheme, it must meet the requirement of four rules below:[1]:69[3]

  1. The chief executive must be chosen by popular election or by a body that was itself popularly elected.
  2. The legislature must be popularly elected.
  3. There must be more than one party competing in the elections.
  4. An alternation in power under electoral rules identical to the ones that brought the incumbent to office must have taken place.

Some regimes may meet the first three rules, but lack an alternation in power in its historical past; these regimes are classified as dictatorships and marked with a type II value, signalling potential classification errors where a democratic regime may be falsely classified as dictatorship[1]:70.

The authors acknowledged that the last rule is more complicated to implement but argued that it helps researchers to control potential errors and enhance the classification schemes' scientific reproducibility.[1]:70

In DD dataset, the Type II variable does not indicate cases of semi-democracy or cases of semi-dictatorship.[1]:71.

The regimes with type2 value of 1 (2008)

For the regimes with type2 of 1, the following list compares the similarities and contrasts between the 2008 data points from the DD dataset and the Polity IV.[1]

Continent subregions Regimes Polity datasets IV Polity datasets IV category DD dataset code DD dataset category DD dataset type2
AsiaSouthern Asia Afghanistan-66Anocracies, special3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaWestern Asia Azerbaijan-7Autocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaWestern Africa Burkina Faso0Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaSouthern Africa Botswana8Democracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaMiddle Africa Central African Republic-1Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaMiddle Africa Cameroon-4Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaMiddle Africa Democratic Republic of the Congo5Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaMiddle Africa Congo-4Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaNorthern Africa Algeria2Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaNorthern Africa Egypt-3Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Eritrea-7Autocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Ethiopia-3Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaMiddle Africa Gabon-4Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaWestern Africa Gambia-5Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaMiddle Africa Equatorial Guinea-5Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AmericasSouth America Guyana6Democracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AmericasCaribbean Haiti5Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaCentral Asia Kazakhstan-6Autocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaSouth-Eastern Asia Cambodia2Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaSouthern Africa Lesotho8Democracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
EuropeSouthern Europe Montenegro9Democracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Mozambique5Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaSouth-Eastern Asia Malaysia6Democracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaSouthern Africa Namibia6Democracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
EuropeEastern Europe Russia4Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Rwanda-3Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaSouth-Eastern Asia Singapore-2Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa SeychellesN/AN/A3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaMiddle Africa Chad-2Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaWestern Africa Togo-4Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaCentral Asia Tajikistan-3Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
OceaniaPolynesia TongaN/AN/A5Royal dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaNorthern Africa Tunisia-4Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Tanzania-1Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Uganda-1Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaCentral Asia Uzbekistan-9Autocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
OceaniaPolynesia SamoaN/AN/A5Royal dictatorship1[note 1]
AsiaWestern Asia Yemen-2Anocracies4Military dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaSouthern Africa South Africa9Democracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Zambia7Democracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]
AfricaEastern Africa Zimbabwe-4Anocracies3Civilian dictatorship1[note 1]

Comparison with other democracy-measuring data sets

The DD dataset is limited to 199 countries after 1946, whereas Boix, Miller, & Rosato, 2013 proposed a data set from 1800 to 2007, covering 219 countries. The 2010 version of Polity data series covers 189 countries from 1800 to 2009.[7]

Gugiu & Centellas developed the Democracy Cluster Classification Index that integrates five democracy indicators (including the DD dataset, Polity dataset, etc.), clustering 24 American and 39 European regimes over 30 years.[2]

See also

Notes

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Only meets the first three of the four rules of the DD index.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Cheibub, José Antonio; Gandhi, Jennifer; Vreeland, James Raymond (April 2010). "Democracy and dictatorship revisited". Public Choice. Springer. 143 (1–2): 67–101. doi:10.1007/s11127-009-9491-2. JSTOR 40661005.
  2. 1 2 Ristei, Mihaiela; Centellas, Miguel (Summer 2013). "The Democracy Cluster Classification Index". Political Analysis. Oxford Journals. 21 (3): 334–349. doi:10.1093/pan/mpt004.
  3. 1 2 3 William R. Keech (14 October 2013). Economic Politics in the United States. Cambridge University Press. pp. 17–. ISBN 978-1-107-00414-6. Retrieved 24 March 2014. Specifically, the DD index (for Democracy and Dictatorship) assesses the United States as a democracy from 1946, the first measured, through 2008, the last year of measurement. ... My definition of a democracy is minimalist, like the DD definition of Cheibub, Gadhi, and Vreeland (2010), but it adds a dimension. Like DD, it considers the presence of contested elections a necessary condition of ....
  4. ↑ Haggard, Stephan; Kaufman, Robert R. (August 2012). "Inequality and regime change: democratic transitions and the stability of democratic rule". American Political Science Review. Cambridge Journals. 106 (3): 495–516. doi:10.1017/S0003055412000287.
  5. ↑ Alvarez, M.; Cheibub, J. A.; Limongi, F.; & Przewroski, A. (1996). "Classifying political regimes". Studies in Comparative International Development. 31 (2): 3–36. doi:10.1007/bf02719326.
  6. ↑ Przeworkski, Adam (2003). "Minimalist Conception of Democracy: A Defense". In Robert Alan Dahl, Ian Shapiro& José Antônio Cheibub. The Democracy Sourcebook. MIT Press. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-262-54147-3. Retrieved 24 March 2014.
  7. ↑ Boix, Carles; Miller, Michael; Rosato, Sebastian (December 2013). "A complete data set of political regimes, 1800–2007". Comparative Political Studies. Sage. 46 (12): 1523–1554. doi:10.1177/0010414012463905.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.