Measuring Democracy: a multidimensional, historical, approach

1. Measuring Democracy: a multidimensional, historical, approach Dinner remarks Michael Coppedge University of Notre Dame

2. Disaggregation • Solves some key challenges to measuring democracy • Sidesteps need for consensus on a definition of democracy • Enables people to create their own customized aggregated index • Enables us to pursue both extension and thick intension (if done right)

3. But challenges remain • Defining even the loose boundaries of the concept • Avoiding concept stretching • Choosing a useful level of measurement • Securing funding • Recruiting, training, and supervising several teams of coders • Sustaining commitment to the project

4. Funding • The way to secure sufficient funding is to write a persuasive and practical proposal • My focus: Realistically, in what ways can we improve on what already exists? • A preliminary assessment of today’s discussions

5. Core features of the democratic ideal • A set of institutions and processes that approximate political equality, i.e., • Every citizen’s preferences receive equal consideration before a binding decision is made • The ability of citizens to form and express their preferences is effectively guaranteed • Deviations from this principle are likely to be caught and corrected • Policies are implemented faithfully and without bias • It’s a sequential, evolving process:

6. Electoral consequences Election of representatives Post-electoral negotiation Direct democracy Policymaking Political organization Checks & balances Social organization Administration Preference formation and expression Agenda-setting

7. See handout • One way to improve is to measure parts of this process that existing indicators ignore • Do we do this? • Can we do this?

8. Limitations • Feasibility is still the biggest constraint: scarce information, finite personnel, time, and resources • We cannot measure every relevant aspect of democracy • We should set aside aspects that are tangential or controversial or impossible: • Individual autonomy, direct democracy, coalition formation, administration…

9. However • We can build on prior efforts • We can define explicitly which aspects we are measuring, and which we are not • We can thicken the concept in some ways • We can extend geographic coverage • We can extend historical coverage

10. And • We can use better measurement techniques • Explicit, concrete coding criteria • Qualitative precision without sacrificing quantitative precision • Multiple indicators for each concept • Multiple coders • Estimates of uncertainty

11. We should plan for eventual aggregation • So we should have multiple indicators for each likely dimension • And we should use the highest level of measurement that we can: ratio or interval whenever possible • Consider probabilities as the units of measurement: the probability of censure, of being able to vote, of getting a fair trial, etc.

12. But we have to stay flexible • Theoretical dimensions should correspond to empirical dimensions, but often they don’t • Empirical dimensions can evolve over the decades

13. Practical questions to discuss • How many teams of coders? • Undergrads? Grad students? Us? Employees? • How would we train them? How would we train after turnover? • How much time can we each devote to this project each year? • What kind of compensation do we expect? • What is the timetable? • Do we do everything at once, or a few indicators at a time?