Category: Public Oversight 1

Tool: Democracy Assessments

Democracy Assessments
1
Keboitse Machangana
IDEA
Tool summary

The State of Democracy (SoD) assessment methodology was developed by

International IDEA in 2000. It is a quality of democracy assessment
framework for use by citizens in evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of
their democracies (in order to raise awareness about the state of their
democracy and contribute to evidence-based advocacy for reform and
contribute to the democratic reform of their country). The assessment should
be undertaken by an inter-disciplinary assessment team accompanied by a
multi-stakeholder consultative/reference team in order to ensure an inclusive
assessment process and the subsequent utilisation of assessment findings.
According to the methodology, preliminary assessment findings are subjected
to public scrutiny, debate and validation through various avenues such as
media, stakeholder workshops and seminars. The methodology is universal in
application, and has been applied in both developing and developed country
contexts. .

What is it?

SoD is a four pillar qualitative democracy assessment framework anchored on

the principles of popular control over public decision making and decision
makers and equality of respect and voice between citizens in the exercise of
that control. This is in addition to seven mediating values viz. participation,
authorization, representation, accountability, transparency, responsiveness
and solidarity, against which democratic institutions and processes are
assessed. Under the four pillars of the assessment framework is a total of 15
sub-pillars, 15 over-arching questions and 75 specific questions. The following
is an overview of the assessment framework (For a detailed version, refer
Assessing the Quality of Democracy: A Practical Guide, 2008):

1. Citizenship, Law 2. Representative & 3. Civil Society & 4. Democracy

& Rights Accountable Popular Participation beyond the State
Government

1.1 Nationhood & 2.1 Free & Fair 3.1 The media in a 4.1 External
Citizenship: Is elections: Do democratic society: influences on the
there agreement elections give the Do the media operate countrys
on a common people control over in a way that sustains democracy: Is the
citizenship governments & their democratic values? impact of external
without policies? influences broadly
discrimination? supportive of the
countrys
democracy?

1
Head of Democracy Assessment and Analysis, International IDEA
Category: Public Oversight 2
Tool: Democracy Assessments

1.2 The Rule of 2.2 The democratic 3.2 Political

Law & Access role of political Participation: Is there 4.2 The countrys
to Justice: Are parties: Does the full citizen participation democratic impact
state & society party system assist in public life? abroad: Do the
consistently the working of countrys
subject to the democracy? international
law? policies contribute
to strengthening
1.3 Civil & Political 2.3 Effective & 3.3 Decentralisation: global democracy?
Rights: Are civil responsive Are decisions taken at
& political rights government: Is the level of
equally government effective government which is
guaranteed for in serving the public & most appropriate for
all? responsive to its the people affected?
concerns

1.4 Economic & 2.4 The democratic

Social Rights: effectiveness of
Are economic & parliament: Does the
social rights parliament or
equally legislature contribute
guaranteed for effectively to the
all? democratic process?

2.5 Civilian control

of military & Police:
Are military & police
under civilian control?

2.6 Integrity in
public life: Is
integrity in the
conduct of public life
assured?

Source: Assessing the Quality of Democracy: A Practical Guide, 2008 p.26.

How is it done?

A SoD assessment is intended to be an inclusive process that contributes to

the democratisation process of the country being assessed. It is also a flexible
assessment framework that can be used in full or in part, focussing on those
specific issues/aspects which are relevant to the country and its context at the
time of the assessment. Broadly, there are five essential steps in the conduct
of a SoD assessment (adapted from Assessing the Quality of Democracy: A
Practical Guide, 2008):
Category: Public Oversight 3
Tool: Democracy Assessments

1. Initial decisions & agenda setting

Define the purpose of the assessment such as for e.g.

consciousness raising, influencing public debate, agenda setting for
reform, programme evaluation etc.
Define the content of the assessment: Depending on the purpose of
the assessment, the needs and the context of a country, it might be
necessary to select only a few areas of assessment or to expand
the areas of assessment beyond those highlighted in the
framework. The framework allows for that flexibility to ensure that
the assessment is relevant and useful to the country.
Establish benchmarks and comparators: The assessment will be
meaningless without standards and benchmarks for comparison.
Again, depending on the purpose of the assessment, one could use
international Standards, regional standards or National standards
and commitments.
Selection of assessors: This is the stage when decisions are made
about the members of the assessment team. An interdisciplinary
and multi-stakeholder assessment team not only allows for diverse
perspectives to enrich the assessment but also improves utility of
the assessment findings.
Identify as comprehensive a range as possible of potential
information sources
Stakeholder consultation: It is important to consult with stakeholders
from the earliest planning stages to gather inputs of the purpose,
focus, content and overall design of the assessment.
Prepare a publication & dissemination strategy.
Establish a time-frame for the assessment.
Prepare a draft budget and obtain necessary resources.

2. Data collection, analysis and organisation

Constructing a bibliography: This involves identifying appropriate

sources of data /information, and, compiling and coding of sources
Identify & sorting data: This stage comprises the painstaking work
of reading and, identifying relevant data or evidence and filing or
recording it under the appropriate question.
Arranging & prioritizing items for inclusion: This is the stage of
arranging the material collected so that it provides a clear picture, or
tells a coherent story, even if it is a complex one.
Confirming answers to search questions: One way of thinking of an
answer to the assessment questions is as a brief summarizing
judgment, with the evidence arranged so that it supports, expands
or explains the judgment in a systematic way.
Writing a draft report: Though the decision about the form and
length of a finished draft may have been taken earlier, both may
Category: Public Oversight 4
Tool: Democracy Assessments

need to be modified in the light of the material assembled. Care

should be taken to avoid long unbroken chunks of texts.
Setting the report in context: It is crucial to write an introduction that
offers an intelligible justification of the need for and the
methodology of the assessment. This information will almost
certainly include a discursive summary of the countrys recent
process of democratic development, and of any features in the
countrys political traditions and culture that may have given the
process its distinctive trajectory and help explain its current
condition.

3. Convening a national workshop

The convening of a national workshop is a key point in the assessment

process in order to discuss the draft report and its provisional findings and
improve its content and presentation. The workshop is also helpful for
drafting some resolutions on the way forward and linking the findings of
the assessment to the reform agenda. Although this event could be
confined to professional and academic experts, it will have much more
impact if it is widened to include leading public figures, government and
party officials, and representatives of human rights and other campaigning
organizations, as well as media personnel and sympathetic figures from
neighbouring countries.

4. Making the democracy assessment public

The final goal of a democracy assessment is to give a countrys society at

large a thorough analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of its
democratic arrangements so that the citizens become aware and take
appropriate actions. Therefore, the final report has to be widely
disseminated and promoted to ensure that its findings are fully debated.
Formulating effective and realistic strategies for dissemination is even
more critical in countries with high level of illiteracy and where the state
censorship of the media is repressive. Deciding the forms of publication of
the report and engaging the media from the very outset prior to the
commencement of assessment is a crucial component of the media
strategy.

5. From assessment to reforms

A democracy assessment is not an end in itself but a means to assist a

democratic reform process by providing the systematic evidence,
argument and comparative data on which reforms might be based. It
could well form the basis for a further and separate stage, which is that of
working up specific reform proposals, perhaps in association with relevant
campaigning groups and experts in key areas identified by the
assessment. The potential for initiating, implementing and sustaining
Category: Public Oversight 5
Tool: Democracy Assessments

significant democratic reforms, however, must be seen as a function of

four larger factors that can act alone or in combination to affect the type of
democratic reform possible, both in the short term and in the longer term.
The four factors are: the contexts in which the assessments were carried
out; the types of influence that the assessment made possible; the
audience to which the assessment was directed; and the types of output
that were produced.

Benefits

SoD assessments provide an opportunity for a country to reflect on the

quality of its democracy, and mount a reform agenda for their country
that is not necessarily imposed by external actors.
SoD assessment methodology is equally applicable in a diverse range
of countries and equally applicable in generating concrete proposals for
democratic reform
Multi-stakeholder inclusion in the assessment process viz. academia,
civil society organisations, political parties, parliament, the executive
etc. not only inculcates a culture of dialogue and debate among various
stakeholders, but ensures that democratic reform agendas are a result
of collective reflection.
Importantly, SoD assessments provide a benchmark/baseline upon
which a country can assess itself over a period of time.

Challenges and lessons

The SoD methodology places critical importance on both professional

and political dimensions of the assessment process. It cannot be a
quick and dirty exercise, and requires adequate human and financial
resources, as well as commitment.
The success of SoD relies heavily on the agents of the assessment
and their ability to provide the broad conditions of ownership for key
stake holders who have the capacity and opportunity to drive the
reform process. Where the assessment enjoys the engagement of key
stakeholders as for e.g. in the case of Mongolia, a reform agenda can
be developed, implemented and monitored.
Applying the whole framework provides an overall snap shot of the
state of democracy at a given time, while a targeted application of the
framework can allow for deeper exploration of specific priority issues.
Experience of assessments has shown that achieving the effective
inclusion of minorities and womens participation; equal access to
justice and protection of the right to life, and meaningful intra-party
democracy still remain rather precarious.
The achievements that have proven relatively easier are: obtaining a
broadly agreed constitution with a bill of rights; establishing some sort
of office of ombudsmen and/or a public defender; holding free elections
and establish universal suffrage; supporting the revival of local
Category: Public Oversight 6
Tool: Democracy Assessments

government; and ensuring the protection of basic freedoms such as

party association, press, speech and assembly.
Category: Public Oversight 7
Tool: Democracy Assessments

Key resources

Beetham, D. et.al (eds). Assessing the Quality of Democracy: A Practical

Guide. International IDEA. (2008)
http://www.idea.int/publications/aqd/index.cfm
This Practical Guide presents International IDEAs State of Democracy
(SoD) assessment Framework. Developed for public use around the
world, the SoD Framework has been applied in some 20 countries
worldwide since its first launch in 2000.

Beetham, D (Ed). The State of Democracy: Democracy Assessments in Eight

Nations Around the World. Springer (2002)
http://www.amazon.com/State-Democracy-Assessments-Nations-
Around/dp/9041119310 (for purchase)
This offline publication is the robust and sensitive study of
democratization in eight very different countries at its varying stages
viz. Bangladesh, El Salvador, Italy, Kenya, Malawi, New Zealand, Peru
and South Korea. This unique comparative study presents the findings
of in-country teams of experts in the eight countries on the state of
democracy in their own country and concludes with an analysis and
synthesis of their findings to suggest an overall general trajectory of the
democratization process.

Council for Community of Democracies (CCD)

http://www.ccd21.org/
CCD is the only nongovernmental organization in the world with an
exclusive focus on the Community of Democracies. It believes that an
effective way to consolidate the gains of democratic expansion is by
strengthening that Community.

CCD: Prospects for Democratic Transition in the Middle East and North
Africa: Implications of the Central/EastEuropean and African Experiences. A
Conference report on the same theme organized in Budapest in 2007
http://ccd21.org/pdf/budapest_report.pdf
The report contains several case studies of countries in democratic
transition based on assessment of the quality of democracy

CHASS, University of Toronto: Democracy Assessment Questionnaire

http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/pol103y/pdf/Questionnaire.pdf
The Democracy assessment questionnaire was developed as the key
instrument for International IDEAs programme on the State of
Democracy. The framework of questions was agreed by an
international panel of experts after exhaustive discussion and
comparison of existing assessment frameworks and methodologies.
Category: Public Oversight 8
Tool: Democracy Assessments

Democratic Audit: Democracy Assessment Framework

http://www.democraticaudit.com/auditing_democracy/
http://www.democraticaudit.com/auditing_democracy/assessmentframework.p
hp
Democratic Audit is a research organization, attached to the Human
Rights Centre, University of Essex in U.K. It draws upon a wide range
of collaborators from academia, journalism, the legal profession and
elsewhere. They conduct original research into the quality of
democracy and political freedom. The document listed in the link
provides a framework for democracy assessments, an adaptation of
the IDEA framework based on 14 principles.

Democracy Centre
http://www.democracyctr.org/about/
Founded in San Francisco in 1992, The Democracy Center works
globally to advance social justice through a combination of
investigation and reporting, training citizens in the art of public
advocacy, and organizing international citizen campaigns. Their
website gives very useful links to organizations and other resources
concerned with democracy assessments.

Democracy Digest
http://www.demdigest.net/blog/about
http://www.demdigest.net/blog/links
Democracy Digest provides news, analysis and information on
democracy assistance and related issues. The blog is a daily
installment of the Democracy Digest e-bulletin and produced at the
National Endowment for Democracy. The Network is affiliated with the
World Movement for Democracy, a global network of democrats
including activists, practitioners, academics, policy makers and
funders, who have come together to cooperate in the promotion of
democracy.

Democracy Reporting International (DRI)

http://www.democracy-reporting.org/e_assessments.html
DRI is a non-partisan, independent and non-for-profit group of experts
formed to promote political participation of citizens, accountability of
state bodies and the development of democratic institutions world-
wide. DRI offers democracy assessments outside elections to remedy
the frequent lack of international attention to the political-electoral
process between elections. These assessments analyze the
implementation of recommendations resulting from previous elections
and consider broader democratization issues.
Category: Public Oversight 9
Tool: Democracy Assessments

DEMOCRACY INTERNATIONAL (DI)

http://democracyinternational.com/reports.html
Democracy International, Inc. (DI) designs, implements, and evaluates
democracy and governance programs worldwide. DI offers expertise in
election processes and election monitoring, political party organizing,
local government and decentralization, legislative strengthening, civil
society development, strategic communications, and rule of law
programming.

Freedom House
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=1
Freedom House, a non-profit, nonpartisan organization, is a clear voice
for democracy and freedom around the world. Through a vast array of
international programs and publications, Freedom House is working to
advance the remarkable worldwide expansion of political and economic
freedom.

Freedom House: Freedom in the World

http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=15
Freedom in the World, a flagship publication of Freedom House, is the
standard-setting comparative assessment of global political rights and
civil liberties. Published annually since 1972, the survey ratings and
narrative reports on 193 countries and 15 related and disputed
territories are used by policymakers, the media, international
corporations, civic activists, and human rights defenders to monitor
trends in democracy and track improvements and setbacks in freedom
worldwide.

Freedom House: Nations in Transit

http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=17&year=2008
Nations in Transit is the only comprehensive, comparative, and
multidimensional study of reform in the former Communist states of
Europe and Eurasia. Nations in Transit tracks the reform record of 29
countries and administrative areas and pinpointed for policymakers,
researchers, journalists, and democracy advocates alike the greatest
reform challenges and reform opportunities facing the countries and
territories that make up this vast geographic space.

Galligan, Y & Clavero, S. Assessing Gender Democracy in the European

Union:
A Methodological Framework. Reconstituting Democracy in Europe,
European Union (RECON)
http://www.qub.ac.uk/cawp/Latest/RECON_wp_0816.pdf
http://www.reconproject.eu/projectweb/portalproject/AboutRECON.html
RECON seeks to clarify whether democracy is possible under
conditions of pluralism, diversity and complex multilevel governance.
This paper presents a methodological framework for assessing the
Category: Public Oversight 10
Tool: Democracy Assessments

quality of democracy in the European Union from a gender perspective.

The methodology was developed in the context of a broader project
that aims to derive a set of empirical indicators of democratic
performance for the European Union, being undertaken within the EU
funded project Reconstituting Democracy in Europe (RECON).

Hachhethu, K et al. Nepal in Transition: A Study on the State of Democracy.

International IDEA (2008)
http://www.idea.int/publications/nepal_in_transition/index.cfm
This report presents major findings of a survey conducted in April 2007
by the Nepal Chapter of the State of Democracy in South Asia and
International IDEA. The findings indicate a shift in the peoples
perspective compared to an earlier survey conducted in 2004.

International Idea
http://www.idea.int/resources/
The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
(International IDEA) is an intergovernmental organization that supports
sustainable democracy worldwide. It is a pioneer in democracy
assessments. The publications and resources section of their website
is a virtual treasure of information and reports on the state of
democracy from a global perspective.

Landman, T & Dellepiane,S. Democracy and Development. An Issue Paper

prepared for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark
http://www.um.dk/NR/rdonlyres/2EE0B728-96A9-4A16-B490-
5297DDA1C8A5/0/DemocracyandDevelopmentDenmarkEssexDraft2.pdf
This issue paper contributes to a discussion on the sets of values and
standards derived from democracy and human rights in the
development of Denmarks approach to and support for the promotion
of democracy and justice.

Mcmahon, E & Kornheiser, E: Assessing the Assessors: Correlating

Democracy Methodologies. In Social Indicators Research .Springer, The
Netherlands (2009)
http://www.springerlink.com/content/72442p204415hx29/
This offline paper considers the question of how to measure
democracy i.e. attach an objective, or at least standardized,
quantitative value to a nation or politys level of democracy. A number
of instruments have been independently developed with this aim in
mind. To what extent do they measure the same phenomenon, and
how closely are their findings correlated? This study finds a significant
variance between recent data from three democracy assessment
instruments analyzed.
Category: Public Oversight 11
Tool: Democracy Assessments

Rossbach, D. Individual Assessments of Democracy in Post-Communist

Europe and Support for the European Union. A paper presented at the annual
meeting of The Midwest Political Science Association, Palmer House Hilton,
Chicago, Illinois, Apr 07, 2005
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/8/4/6/5/p84
653_index.html
This offline paper examines the effect that satisfaction with the
progress of democratization in East Central Europe has on an
individuals views towards joining the European Union.

The National Democratic Institute: Democracy Assessment in Bosnia-

Herzegovina
http://www.ndi.org/
http://www.ndi.org/files/Bosnia_Assessment_Report.pdf
The National Democratic Institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan
organization working to support and strengthen democratic institutions
worldwide through citizen participation, openness and accountability in
government. The report examines the post-conflict and post-communist
legacies impeding Bosnias democratic transition and presents
recommendations on democracy assistance going forward.

The Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy (NIMD)

http://www.nimd.org/page/about_nimd
http://www.nimd.org/page/nimd_publications
The Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy (NIMD) is a
democracy assistance organization for political parties in young
democracies. NIMD is currently working with more than 150 political
parties from 17 programme countries in Africa, Latin America, Asia and
Eastern Europe. Their website offers a good list of resources on
democracy-centric organizations

The State of Democracy in Asia Report, Oxford University Press (2007)

http://www.democracy-asia.org/index.htm
http://www.oup.co.in/search_detail.php?id=144394
The State of Democracy in South Asia project is an attempt to answer
the question: Is a South Asian imagination of Democracy available for
reconstruction? It adopts an approach that integrates insights from
several worlds that of the academic as well as that of the activist. The
report is offline and can be purchased from the link above.
Category: Public Oversight 12
Tool: Democracy Assessments

Tungwarara, O. Evaluating Democratic Progress in Africa. in Democracy at

Large, Volume 3. The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES)
http://www.democracyatlarge.org/vol3_no1/vol3_no1_Tungwarara.htm
The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) is an
independent, non-governmental organization providing professional
support to electoral democracy. Democracy at large is an online journal
of IFES designed to reflect the varied interests and concerns of
democracy professionals. The article shows how using continental
standards of democratic governance, AfriMAP is helping African
researchers measure progress towards democracy and identify
obstacles to further democratic growth

UNDP: Governance Assessment Portal (GAP)

http://gap.itsyn.com/areas-of-governance/democracy
The Governance Assessment Portal aims to be a hub of information
and resources and a valuable entry-point on democratic governance
assessments.

USAID Office of Democracy & Governance (DG): Strategic Assessment

http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/democracy_and_governance/technical_areas/
dg_office/assess.html
This link provides information and reports of DG Offices work that
mostly relates to assessment of the state of democracy in aid-recipient
countries.
Category: Public Oversight 13
Tool: Democracy Assessments

Case studies

The Mongolia democracy assessment

The Mongolia democracy assessment was the first government-led SoD

assessment. The assessment benefited a lot from multi-disciplinary and multi-
stakeholder participation. The Mongolia SoD assessment was motivated by
that countrys role as chair of the International Conference of New & Restored
Democracies (ICNRD) and its commitment to develop democratic
governance indicators were in accordance with the ICNRD-5 outcome
document. It is important to note that in using the IDEA assessment
framework, Mongolia contextualised it by introducing satellite indicators
which captured Mongolias peculiarities and context, while maintaining the
universal or core indicators of democratic governance which would allow for
comparative analysis. Mongolia also used other research methods and tools
to complement the SoD assessment framework. In the words of Ambassador
Ochir Enkhtsetseg, Permanent Representative of Mongolia to the United
Nations, the Mongolia assessment process was a highly participative process
achieved through dialogues, debates and various conferences which were
organised to communicate both the process and the findings of the
assessment. The assessment process is also said to have raised awareness
among members of the public about the state of democracy in Mongolia.

As a result of the democracy assessment, Mongolia identified a 9th Millennium

Development Goal for itself, in order to address priority issues emerging from
the assessment. The MDG 9 focuses on human rights, democratic
governance and corruption. This is an example of how an assessment can be
useful in identifying priorities for reform.

Through partnership with UNDP, Mongolia developed democratic governance

indicators (DGI) which are now being used to monitor progress in addressing
identified priority areas for reform. These democratic governance indicators
have been institutionalised as part of the National Indicator and Monitoring
system implemented by the National Statistics Office. Ambassador Ochir
further acknowledged the capacity built through the assessment. She noted
that the assessment team was trained in the assessment methodology and
they have now acquired knowledge and skills for applying and SoD.
Therefore, SoD assessments are also valuable in building in-country capacity
for, defining indicators of democracy, and monitoring and evaluating them
from the point of view of the citizens of the country. For further information
listen to Ambassador Ochir on:
http://www.idea.int/sod/ochir_enkhtset_interview.cfm
Category: Public Oversight 14
Tool: Democracy Assessments

Democracy assessment and reforms in The Philippines

The Philippines is an example of a country where the SoD assessment

framework was applied in a targeted manner. The Philippines assessment
team, led by Professor Edna Co of the University of the Philippines has now
conducted a total of four assessments focussing on specific topics within the
assessment framework. The first assessment conducted in 2005 focussed on
Free and Fair Elections and the Democratic Role of Political Parties. The
second assessment conducted in 2007 focussed on Corruption. The third
assessment conducted in 2007 focussed on Social & Economic Rights. The
fourth assessment that is currently ongoing focuses on Rule of Law & Access
to Justice in the Philippines. All these assessments have been hailed as
invaluable resources for institutions such as the Philippines Electoral
Commission, the Office of the Ombudsman in the Philippines and the Human
Rights Commission of the Philippines.

The Philippines SoD assessment teams are often constituted by a mix of

academics and representatives of civil society organisations. The Philippines
case provides a good example of how, when resources are not available to
apply the whole assessment framework at once, the assessment can be
applied in a targeted manner focussing critical issues of importance to the
country at a specific point in time. For more information listen to Prof. Edna
Co. on: http://www.idea.int/sod/sod_in_the_philippines.cfm