IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v6y2018i1p22-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptualizing and Measuring the Quality of Democracy: The Citizens’ Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Dieter Fuchs

    (Department of Social Science, University of Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Edeltraud Roller

    (Department of Political Science, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany)

Abstract

In recent years, several measurements of the quality of democracy have been developed (e.g. Democracy Barometer, Varieties of Democracy Project). These objective measurements focus on institutional and procedural characteristics of democracy. This article starts from the premise that in order to fully understand the quality of democracy such objective measurements have to be complemented by subjective measurements based on the perspective of citizens. The aim of the article is to conceptualize and measure the subjective quality of democracy. First, a conceptualization of the subjective quality of democracy is developed consisting of citizens’ support for three normative models of democracy (electoral, liberal, and direct democracy). Second, based on the World Values Survey 2005–2007, an instrument measuring these different dimensions of the subjective quality of democracy is suggested. Third, distributions for different models of democracy are presented for some European and non-European liberal democracies. They reveal significant differences regarding the subjective quality of democracies. Fourth, the subjective quality of democracy of these countries is compared with the objective quality of democracy based on three indices (electoral democracy, liberal democracy and direct popular vote) developed by the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Finally, further research questions are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Dieter Fuchs & Edeltraud Roller, 2018. "Conceptualizing and Measuring the Quality of Democracy: The Citizens’ Perspective," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 22-32.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:22-32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1188
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Merkel, Wolfgang, 2004. "Embedded and defective democracies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 11(5), pages 33-58.
    2. Easton, David, 1975. "A Re-assessment of the Concept of Political Support," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 435-457, October.
    3. Mayne, Quinton & Geissel, Brigitte, 2016. "Putting the Demos Back Into the Concept of Democratic Quality," Scholarly Articles 25286593, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. O. Fiona Yap, 2021. "Local politics for democratic quality and depth: Lessons from South Korea," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 5-14, January.
    2. Giebler, Heiko & Ruth, Saskia P. & Tanneberg, Dag, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.
    3. Heiko Giebler & Saskia P. Ruth & Dag Tanneberg, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johannes Helgest & Lion Merten & Jana Niedringhaus & Matthias Rosenthal & Kevin Walz, 2022. "A new game in town: Democratic resilience and the added value of the concept in explaining democratic survival and decline," Working Papers 2206, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    2. Julian Aichholzer & Sylvia Kritzinger & Carolina Plescia, 2021. "National identity profiles and support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 293-315, June.
    3. Lourdes ROJAS RUBIO, 2022. "Inequality, Corruption and Support for Democracy," THEMA Working Papers 2022-20, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    4. Soetkin Verhaegen & Marc Hooghe & Ellen Quintelier, 2014. "European Identity and Support for European Integration: A Matter of Perceived Economic Benefits?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 295-314, May.
    5. Ekkart Zimmermann, 2009. "Formen des politischen Terrorismus: ein Plädoyer für eine Differentialdiagnose," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(4), pages 11-28.
    6. Arjan H Schakel & A J Brown, 2022. "Dissecting Public Opinion on Regional Authority: Four Types of Regionalists Based on Citizens’ Preferences for Self-Rule and Shared Rule," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 52(2), pages 310-328.
    7. repec:gig:joupla:v:3:y:2011:i:1:p:29-64 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Delhey, Jan, 2002. "Korruption in Bewerberländern zur Europäischen Union: Institutionenqualität und Korruption in vergleichender Perspektive," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Social Structure and Social Reporting FS III 02-401, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    9. Michal Madr, 2016. "Economic Development as a Factor of Democratisation: Evidence from Post-Socialist Economies," MENDELU Working Papers in Business and Economics 2016-70, Mendel University in Brno, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    10. Stroh, Alexander & Elischer, Sebastian & Erdmann, Gero, 2012. "Origins and Outcomes of Electoral Institutions in African Hybrid Regimes: A Comparative Perspective," GIGA Working Papers 197, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    11. Daicia Price & Tore Bonsaksen & Mary Ruffolo & Janni Leung & Vivian Chiu & Hilde Thygesen & Mariyana Schoultz & Amy Ostertun Geirdal, 2021. "Perceived Trust in Public Authorities Nine Months after the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Cross-National Study," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, September.
    12. Fuchs, Dieter, 1998. "The political culture of unified Germany," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions and Social Change FS III 98-204, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    13. Biegoń, Dominika & Gronau, Jennifer & Schmidtke, Henning, 2013. "Magic mirror on the wall, who in the world is legitimate after all? Legitimacy claims of international institutions," TranState Working Papers 169, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    14. Luís Aguiar-Conraria & Pedro C. Magalhães, 2018. "Procedural Fairness, the Economy, and Support for Political Authorities (Forthcoming at Political Psychology (submitted pre-print version))," NIPE Working Papers 05/2018, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    15. Murat Somer & Jennifer McCoy, 2019. "Transformations through Polarizations and Global Threats to Democracy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 681(1), pages 8-22, January.
    16. Erhan Örselli & Esra Banu Sipahi, 2014. "Trust towards Administrative Institutions among Youth in Turkey: the Case of Konya," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 0201765, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    17. Gabriela Lotta & Roberto Pires & Michael Hill & Marie Ostergaard Møller, 2022. "Recontextualizing street‐level bureaucracy in the developing world," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(1), pages 3-10, February.
    18. Alexander F. Wagner & Friedrich Schneider, 2006. "Satisfaction with Democracy and the Environment in Western Europe – a Panel Analysis," CESifo Working Paper Series 1660, CESifo.
    19. repec:gig:joupla:v:2:y:2010:i:3:p:99-128 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Niels Spierings, 2017. "Trust and Tolerance across the Middle East and North Africa: A Comparative Perspective on the Impact of the Arab Uprisings," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 4-15.
    21. Svend-Erik Skaaning, 2018. "Different Types of Data and the Validity of Democracy Measures," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 105-116.
    22. Nicholas Clark & Robert Rohrschneider, 2021. "Tracing the development of nationalist attitudes in the EU," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 181-201, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:22-32. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.