IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v47y2013i6p3457-3471.html

How to measure polyarchy with Freedom House: a proposal for revision

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Denk

Abstract

In studies on democracy and democratization, the Freedom House Index (FHI) is frequently used to measure the concept of polyarchy. This approach creates an often noticed discrepancy between the conceptual and measurement levels. The concept of polyarchy is regarded as a minimalist definition of democracy, which mainly refers to the procedural aspects of political systems, while FHI indicates a maximalist definition of democracy. This article presents a proposal to improve the conceptual validity when FHI is used to measure the concept of polyarchy. The proposal suggests that the FHI is adjusted in two aspects. First, some sub-categories within the FHI are excluded based on their lack of relevance for the concept of polyarchy. Second, the principle of aggregation is changed from simple arithmetic addition to multiplication, which corresponds to the idea that all democratic institutions, according to the concept of polyarchy, are necessary for the democratic system. These two suggestions create a revisited index that is based on the FHI. As illustrated with empirical analyses, the revisited index provides a quite different view of democratization at the global and state levels. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Denk, 2013. "How to measure polyarchy with Freedom House: a proposal for revision," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 3457-3471, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:6:p:3457-3471
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-012-9732-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-012-9732-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-012-9732-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Høyland, Bjørn & Moene, Karl & Willumsen, Fredrik, 2012. "The tyranny of international index rankings," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 1-14.
    2. David A Armstrong II, 2011. "Stability and change in the Freedom House political rights and civil liberties measures," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 48(5), pages 653-662, September.
    3. Sartori, Giovanni, 1970. "Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 1033-1053, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mariateresa Ciommi & Chiara Gigliarano & Francesco M. Chelli & Mauro Gallegati, 2022. "It is the Total that Does [Not] Make the Sum: Nature, Economy and Society in the Equitable and Sustainable Well-Being of the Italian Provinces," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 491-522, June.
    2. Cornelius A. Rietveld & Pankaj C. Patel, 2023. "A Critical Assessment of the National Expert Survey Data of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(6), pages 2494-2507, November.
    3. Xinyu Zhang & Yue Liao, 2023. "A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Populism Research (2000–2020)," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    4. Merkel, Wolfgang, 2026. "What is democratic resilience?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 472-493.
    5. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    6. Chris Tofallis, 2013. "An automatic-democratic approach to weight setting for the new human development index," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 1325-1345, October.
    7. Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2007. "European Social Models between Globalisation and Europeanisation," MPRA Paper 12767, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Peters, Ina, 2014. "Too Abstract to Be Feasible? Applying the Grounded Theory Method in Social Movement Research," GIGA Working Papers 247, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    9. Pursey Heugens & J. Oosterhout & Muel Kaptein, 2006. "Foundations and Applications for Contractualist Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 211-228, October.
    10. Ashlyn W. Hand & Nilay Saiya, 2023. "Democracy’s Ambivalent Effect on Terrorism," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(7-8), pages 1618-1643, August.
    11. Xiaohong Yu & Zhaoyang Sun, 2022. "The company they keep: When and why Chinese judges engage in collegiality," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 936-1002, December.
    12. Matthijs Bogaards & Markus M.L. Crepaz, 2002. "Consociational Interpretations of the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 357-381, September.
    13. Johanne Døhlie Saltnes & Martijn Mos, 2022. "Understanding the EU’s Response to LGBTI Rights Violations: Inter-Institutional Differences and Social Sanctions," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 79-89.
    14. Springer, Emily, 2021. "Caught between winning repeat business and learning: Reactivity to output indicators in international development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    15. Tero Erkkilä, 2023. "Global indicators and AI policy: Metrics, policy scripts, and narratives," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(5), pages 811-839, September.
    16. Suman Seth & Mark McGillivray, 2018. "Composite indices, alternative weights, and comparison robustness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(4), pages 657-679, December.
    17. Andersson, Kent & Bang, Martin & Marcus, Carina & Persson, Björn & Sturesson, Peter & Jensen, Eva & Hult, Gunnar, 2015. "Military utility: A proposed concept to support decision-making," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 23-32.
    18. Qiamuddin ANDAISH & Yogesh N. VANSIYA, 2025. "A comparative analysis of development in SAARC countries in the relation of sustainable development – taxonomic analysis," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(2(643), S), pages 53-70, Summer.
    19. Matthew M. C. Allen & Geoffrey Wood & Mehmet Demirbag, 2022. "Developing theoretically informed typologies in international business: Why we need them, and how to do it," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(9), pages 2133-2146, December.
    20. Liesbet Hooghe & Gary Marks, 2015. "Delegation and pooling in international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 305-328, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:6:p:3457-3471. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.