Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
  • Home
EnglishFrançais
Perspectives on Politics Perspectives on Politics

Article contents

Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2011

Michael Coppedge ,
John Gerring ,
David Altman ,
Michael Bernhard ,
Steven Fish ,
Allen Hicken ,
Matthew Kroenig ,
Staffan I. Lindberg ,
Kelly McMann ,
Pamela Paxton ,
Holli A. Semetko ,
Svend-Erik Skaaning ,
Jeffrey Staton  and
Jan Teorell
Michael Coppedge
Affiliation:
Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies, the University of Notre Dame (coppedge.1@nd.edu)
John Gerring
Affiliation:
Boston University (jgerring@bu.edu)
David Altman
Affiliation:
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Michael Bernhard
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Steven Fish
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Allen Hicken
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Matthew Kroenig
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
Staffan I. Lindberg
Affiliation:
Gothenburg University and the University of Florida
Kelly McMann
Affiliation:
Case Western Reserve University
Pamela Paxton
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin
Holli A. Semetko
Affiliation:
Emory University
Svend-Erik Skaaning
Affiliation:
Aarhus University
Jeffrey Staton
Affiliation:
Emory University
Jan Teorell
Affiliation:
Lund University
Corresponding
E-mail address:
coppedge.1@nd.edu
jgerring@bu.edu
Get access
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the wake of the Cold War, democracy has gained the status of a mantra. Yet there is no consensus about how to conceptualize and measure regimes such that meaningful comparisons can be made through time and across countries. In this prescriptive article, we argue for a new approach to conceptualization and measurement. We first review some of the weaknesses among traditional approaches. We then lay out our approach, which may be characterized as historical,multidimensional,disaggregated, and transparent. We end by reviewing some of the payoffs such an approach might bring to the study of democracy.

Type
Research Article
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2011 , pp. 247 - 267
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.
If you should have access and can't see this content please contact technical support.

References

Abbott, Andrew. 1995. “Sequence Analysis: New Methods for Old Ideas.” Annual Review of Sociology 21: 93–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Andrew, and Tsay, Angela. 2000. “Sequence Analysis and Optimal Matching Methods in Sociology.” Sociological Methods and Research 29: 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acuna-Alfaro, Jairo. 2005. “Measuring Democracy in Latin America (1972–2002).” Working Paper No. 5, Committee on Concepts and Methods (C&M) of the International Political Science Association (August).Google Scholar
Altman, David, and Pérez-Liñán, Aníbal. 2002. “Assessing the Quality of Democracy: Freedom, Competitiveness and Participation in Eighteen Latin American Countries.” Democratization 9(2): 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, Michael, Cheibub, Jose A., Limongi, Fernando, and Przeworski, Adam. 1996. “Classifying Political Regimes.” Studies in Comparative International Development 31(2): 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Political Science Association. 1950. Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System. New York: Holt, Rinehart.Google Scholar
Arat, Zehra F. 1991. Democracy and Human Rights in Developing Countries. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Arndt, Christiane, and Oman, Charles. 2006. Uses and Abuses of Governance Indicators. Paris: OECD Development Centre.Google Scholar
Arneson, Richard J. 2004. “Democracy Is Not Intrinsically Just.” In Justice and Democracy, ed. Dowding, Keith, Goodin, Robert E., and Pateman, Carole. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bächtiger, André, ed. 2005. Acta Politica 40(1-2). Special issue: “Empirical Approaches to Deliberative Democracy.”Google Scholar
Bagehot, Walter. 1963 [1867]. The English Constitution. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Barber, Benjamin. 1988. The Conquest of Politics: Liberal Philosophy in Democratic Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Beetham, David, ed. 1994. Defining and Measuring Democracy. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Beetham, David 1999. Democracy and Human Rights. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Beetham, David 2004. “Towards a Universal Framework for Democracy Assessment.” Democratization 11(2): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beetham, David, Bracking, Sarah, Kearton, Iain, and Weir, Stuart, eds. 2001. International IDEA Handbook on Democracy Assessment. The Hague: Kluge Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Benelo, George C., and Roussopoulos, Dimitrios, eds. 1971. The Case for Participatory Democracy: Some Prospects for a Radical Society. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Berg-Schlosser, Dirk. 2004a. “Indicators of Democracy and Good Governance as Measures of the Quality of Democracy in Africa: A Critical Appraisal.” Acta Politica 39(3): 248–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg-Schlosser, Dirk. 2004b. “The Quality of Democracies in Europe as Measured by Current Indicators of Democratization and Good Governance.” Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 20(1): 28–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, Sheri. 1997. “Civil Society and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic.” World Politics 49(3): 401–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernhard, Michael, Nordstrom, Timothy, and Reenock, Christopher. 2001. “Economic Performance, Institutional Intermediation, and Democratic Survival.” Journal of Politics 63: 775–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertelsmann Foundation. [various years]. Bertelsmann Transformation Index [2003–]: Towards Democracy and a Market Economy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Besancon, Marie. 2003. “Good Governance Rankings: The Art of Measurement.” World Peace Foundation Reports 36. Cambridge, MA: World Peace Foundation.Google Scholar
Bohman, James. 1998. “Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy.” Journal of Political Philosophy 6(4): 400–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boix, Carles, and Rosato, Sebastian. 2001. “A Complete Data Set of Political Regimes, 1800–1999.” Chicago: Department of Political Science, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Boix, Carles, and Stokes, Susan C.. 2003. “Endogenous Democratization.” World Politics 55(4): 517–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A. 1980. “Issues in the Comparative Measurement of Political Democracy.” American Sociological Review 45: 370–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A. 1993. “Liberal Democracy: Validity and Method Factors in Cross-National Measures.” American Journal of Political Science 37(4): 1207–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A. 2001. “Cross-National Indicators of Liberal Democracy, 1950–1990.” 2nd ICPSR version. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina and Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.Google Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A., and Paxton, Pamela. 2000. “Subjective Measures of Liberal Democracy.” Comparative Political Studies 33(1): 58–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A., and Jackman, Robert W.. 1989. “Democracy, Stability, and Dichotomies.” American Sociological Review 54(4): 612–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, Kirk, Lehoucq, Fabrice, and Mahoney, James. 2005. “Measuring Political Democracy: Case Expertise, Data Adequacy, and Central America.” Comparative Political Studies 38(8): 939–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhlmann, Marc, Merkel, Wolfgang, and Wessels, Bernhard. 2008. “The Quality of Democracy: Democracy Barometer for Established Democracies.” National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) of the Swiss National Science Foundation, Working Paper No. 10a.Google Scholar
Carson, Carol S. 1975. “The History of the United States National Income and Product Accounts: The Develoment of an Analytical Tool.” Journal of Income and Wealth 21: 153–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casper, Gretchen, and Tufis, Claudiu. 2003. “Correlation Versus Interchangeability: The Limited Robustness of Empirical Findings on Democracy Using Highly Correlated Data Sets.” Political Analysis 11: 196–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cederman, Lars-Erik, Wimmer, Andreas, and Min, Brian. 2010. “Why Do Ethnic Groups Rebel? New Data and Analysis.” World Politics 62(1): 87–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheibub, Jose Antonio, and Gandhi, Jennifer. 2004. “Classifying Political Regimes: A Six-Fold Measure of Democracies and Dictatorship.” Presented at the annual meetings of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September 2–5.Google Scholar
Cheibub, Jose Antonio, Gandhi, Jennifer, and Vreeland, James Raymond. 2010. “Democracy and Dictatorship Revisited.” Public Choice 143(1–2): 67–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cingranelli, David L., and Richards, David L.. 1999. “Measuring the Pattern, Level, and Sequence of Government Respect for Human Rights.” International Studies Quarterly 43: 407–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cingranelli, David L., and Richards, David L.. n.d. The CIRI Human Rights Dataset, http://ciri.binghamton.edu/index.asp.Google Scholar
Clark, Terry, and Hoffmann-Martinot, Vincent, eds. 1998. The New Political Culture. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua. 1989. “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy.” In The Good Polity, ed. Hamlin, Alan and Petit, Phillip. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Collier, David, and Adcock, Robert 1999. “Democracy and Dichotomies: A Pragmatic Approach to Choices about Concepts.” Annual Review of Political Science 2: 537–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, David, and Levitsky, Steven. 1997. “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research.” World Politics 49: 430–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppedge, Michael. 1999. “Thickening Thin Concepts and Theories: Combining Large N and Small in Comparative Politics.” Comparative Politics 31(4): 465–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppedge, Michael, Alvarez, Angel, and Maldonado, Claudia. 2008. “Two Persistent Dimensions of Democracy: Contestation and Inclusiveness.” Journal of Politics 70(3): 335–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppedge, Michael, and Reinicke, Wolfgang H.. 1990. “Measuring Polyarchy.” Studies in Comparative International Development 25(1): 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1956. A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1982. Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1989. Democracy and its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, Larry, and Morlino, Leonardo, eds. 2005. Assessing the Quality of Democracy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2009. “Democratization as Deliberative Capacity Building.” Comparative Political Studies 42(11), 1379–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2010. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, John. 1995. Democracy: A History. Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press.Google Scholar
Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). 2010. “Democracy Index 2010: Democracy in Retreat.” Economist Intelligence Unit. (http://www.eiu.com/public/democracy_index.aspx), accessed January 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Elkins, Zachary. 2000. “Gradations of Democracy? Empirical Tests of Alternative Conceptualizations.” American Journal of Political Science 44(2): 287–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elkins, Zachary, Ginsburg, Tom, and Melton, James. 2011. Comparative Constitutions Project. (http://www.comparativeconstitutionsproject.org/index.htm), accessed February 1, 2011.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon, ed. 1998. Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkel, Steve, Pérez-Liñán, Anibal, and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 2007. “The Effects of U.S. Foreign Assistance on Democracy Building, 1990–2003.” World Politics 59: 404–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 1991. Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ford, Henry Jones. 1898/1967. The Rise and Growth of American Politics. New York: Da Capo.Google Scholar
Foweraker, Joe, and Krznaric, Roman. 2000. “Measuring Liberal Democratic Performance: An Empirical and Conceptual Critique.” Political Studies 48(4): 759–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedom House. 2007. “Methodology,” Freedom in the World 2007. New York. (http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=351&ana_page=333&year=2007), accessed September 5, 2007.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2005. “Deliberation before the Revolution: Toward an Ethics of Deliberative Democracy in an Unjust World.” Political Theory 33(2): 397–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Archon, and Wright, Erik Olin, eds. 2003. Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Gallie, W. B. 1956. “Essentially Contested Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56: 167–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasiorowski, Mark J. 1996. “An Overview of the Political Regime Change Dataset.” Comparative Political Studies 29(4): 469–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gates, Scott, Hegre, Håvard, Jones, Mark P., and Strand, Håvard. 2006. “Institutional Inconsistency and Political Instability: Polity Duration, 1800–2000.” American Journal of Political Science 50(4): 893–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerring, John, Bond, Philip, Barndt, William, and Moreno, Carola. 2005. “Democracy and Growth: A Historical Perspective.” World Politics 57(3): 323–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gleditsch, Kristian S., and Ward, Michael D.. 1997. “Double Take: A Re-examination of Democracy and Autocracy in Modern Polities.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 41: 361–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goertz, Gary. 2006. Social Science Concepts: A User's Guide. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goodnow, Frank J. 1900. Politics and Administration. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gordon, Scott. 1999. Controlling the State: Constitutionalism from Ancient Athens to Today. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jurgen. 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jurgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hadenius, Axel. 1992. Democracy and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadenius, Axel, and Teorell, Jan. 2005. “Assessing Alternative Indices of Democracy.” Committee on Concepts and Methods Working Paper Series, August.Google Scholar
Hamilton, Alexander, Madison, James, and Jay, John. 1992 [1787–88]. The Federalist. Ed. Brock, William R.. London: Everyman/J.M. Dent.Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich A. 1960. The Constitution of Liberty. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Held, David. 2006. Models of Democracy, 3d ed.Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Herrera, Yoshiko M., and Kapur, Devesh. 2007. “Improving Data Quality: Actors, Incentives, and Capabilities.” Political Analysis 15(4): 365–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirst, Paul Q., ed. 1989. The Pluralist Theory of the State: Selected Writings of G.D.H. Cole, J.N. Figgis, and H.J. Laski. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
IDEA. [n.d.] Global Database of Quotas for Women. (http://www.quotaproject.org/), accessed February 1, 2011.Google Scholar
IDEA. [n.d.] Global Survey of Voter Turnout. (http://www.idea.int/vt/index.cfm), accessed February 1, 2011.Google Scholar
Interparliamentary Union (IPU). [n.d.] Women in National Parliaments Statistical Archive. (http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif-arc.htm), accessed February 1, 2011.Google Scholar
Isaac, Jeffrey C.n.d.“Thinking About the Quality of Democracy and its Promotion.” Unpublished ms.Google Scholar
Jackman, Simon. 2008. “Measurement.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, ed. Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., Brady, Henry E., and Collier, David. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2009. “The More the Merrier? The Effects of Having Multiple International Election Monitoring Organizations.” Perspectives on Politics 7(1): 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krook, Mona Lee. 2009. Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurtz, Marcus J., and Schrank, Andrew. 2007. “Growth and Governance: Models, Measures, and Mechanisms.” Journal of Politics 69(2): 538–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Todd. 2003. “Map-Making and Analysis of the Main International Initiatives on Developing Indicators on Democracy and Good Governance.” Unpublished manuscript, University of Essex.Google Scholar
Landman, Todd. 2004. “Measuring Human Rights: Principle, Practice, and Policy.” Human Rights Quarterly 26(4): 906–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Todd and Carvalho, Edzia. 2009. Measuring Human Rights. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Landman, Todd and Carvalho, Edzia. 2008. Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics: An Introduction, 3rd Edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret. 1996. “Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work.” Politics & Society 24(1): 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Charles E. 1977. Politics and Markets: The World's Political-Economic Systems. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lively, Jack. 1975. Democracy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lowell, A. Lawrence. 1889. Essays on Government. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Macpherson, C.B. 1977. The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mahoney, James, and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, eds. 2003. Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1983. Beyond Adversarial Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Monty G., and Jaggers, Keith. 2007. “Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2006.” (http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/p4manualv2006.pdf), accessed February 1, 2011.Google Scholar
McFaul, Michael. 2005. “Transitions from Postcommunism.” Journal of Democracy 16(3): 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHenry, Dean E. Jr. 2000. “Quantitative Measures of Democracy in Africa: An Assessment.” Democratization 7(2): 168–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1958 [1865]. Considerations on Representative Government, 3d ed., ed. Shields, Curren V.. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Moon, Bruce E., Birdsall, Jennifer Harvey, Ciesluk, Sylvia, Garlett, Lauren M., Hermias, Joshua H., Mendenhall, Elizabeth, Schmid, Patrick D., and Wong, Wai Hong. 2006. “Voting Counts: Participation in the Measurement of Democracy.” Studies in Comparative International Development 41(2): 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munck, Gerardo L. 2009. Measuring Democracy: A Bridge between Scholarship and Politics. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Munck, Gerardo L., and Verkuilen, Jay. 2002. “Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: Alternative Indices.” Comparative Political Studies 35(1): 5–34.Google Scholar
Mutz, Diana C. 2008. “Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory?” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 521–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielson, Daniel L., Powers, Ryan M., and Tierney, Michael J.. 2010. “Broad Trends in Foreign Aid: Insights from PLAID 1.9.1.” Presented at the conference: Aid Transparency and Development Finance: Lessons and Insights from AidData. Oxford, March 22–25.Google Scholar
Nunn, Nathan. 2009. “The Importance of History for Economic Development.” Annual Review of Economics 1(1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pateman, Carole. 1976. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Paxton, Pamela. 2000. “Women's Suffrage in the Measurement of Democracy: Problems of Operationalization.” Studies in Comparative International Development 35(3): 92–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paxton, Pamela, Green, Jennifer, and Hughes, Melanie. 2008. Women in Parliament, 1945–2003: Cross-National Dataset [Computer file]. ICPSR24340-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2008-12-22. doi:10.3886/ICPSR24340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paxton, Pamela, Bollen, Kenneth A., Lee, Deborah M., and Kim, Hyojoung. 2003. “A Half-Century of Suffrage: New Data and a Comparative Analysis.” Studies in Comparative International Development 38(1): 93–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pemstein, Daniel, Meserve, Stephen, and Melton, James. 2010. “Democratic Compromise: A Latent Variable Analysis of Ten Measures of Regime Type.” Political Analysis 18(4): 426–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Persson, Torsten, and Tabellini, Guido. 2006. “Democratic Capital: The Nexus of Political and Economic Change.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Pitkin, Hanna Fenichel. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, J.G.A. 1975. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Proyecto Estado de la Nación 2001. Informe de la auditoría ciudadana sobre la calidad de la democracia en Costa Rica. San José, Costa Rica: Proyecto Estado de la Nación.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, Alvarez, Michael E., Cheibub, José Antonio, and Limongi, Fernando. 2000. Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranney, Austin. 1962. The Doctrine of Responsible Party Government: Its Origins and Present State. Urbana: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Ryfe, David M. 2005. “Does Deliberative Democracy Work?” Annual Review of Political Science 8: 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saward, Michael. 1998. The Terms of Democracy. Oxford: Polity.Google Scholar
Saward, Michael. 2003. Democracy. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E.E. 1942. Party Government. New York: Rinehart.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas. 2006a. “Patterns of Manipulation: Towards a Topography of Authoritarian Regimes, 1980–2002.” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Political Science, CIDE.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas. 2006b. “When Do Losers Protest?” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Political Science, CIDE.Google Scholar
Schneider, Carsten Q. 2010. “Issues in Measuring Political Regimes.” Working Paper 2010/12, Center for the Study of Imperfections in Democracy, Central European University. (http://disc.ceu.hu/working-papers).Google Scholar
Schneider, Carsten Q., and Schmitter, Philippe C.. 2004a. “The Democratization Dataset, 1974–2000.” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Political Science, Central European University.Google Scholar
Schneider, Carsten Q., and Schmitter, Philippe C.. 2004b. “Liberalization, Transition and Consolidation: Measuring the Components of Democratization.” Democratization 11(5): 59–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1950 [1942]. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper & Bros.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Ian, and Hacker-Cordon, Casiano, eds. 1999. Democracy's Value. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steiner, Jurg, Bachtiger, Andre, Sporndli, Markus, and Steenbergen, Marco R.. 2004. Deliberative Politics in Action: Analysing Parliamentary Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steinmo, Sven, Thelen, Kathleen, and Longstreth, Frank, eds. 1992. Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sudders, Matthew, and Nahem, Joachim. 2004. Governance Indicators: A Users' Guide. Oslo: UNDP.Google Scholar
Thomas, Melissa A. 2010. “What Do the Worldwide Governance Indicators Measure?” European Journal of Development Research 22: 31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Dennis F. 2008. “Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 497–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treier, Shawn, and Jackman, Simon. 2008. “Democracy as a Latent Variable.” American Journal of Political Science 52(1): 201–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Department of State. [1975–2009]. Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. Washington, DC: US House of Representatives, Committee on Foreign Affairs, and Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations.Google Scholar
US Office of Personnel Management Investigations Service. 2001. Citizenship Laws of the World. (http://www.multiplecitizenship.com/documents/IS-01.pdf), accessed February 1, 2011.Google Scholar
USAID. 1998. Handbook of Democracy and Governance Program Indicators. Technical Publication Series PN-ACC-390. Washington: USAID Center for Democracy and Governance.Google Scholar
Vanhanen, Tatu. 2000. “A New Dataset for Measuring Democracy, 1810–1998.” Journal of Peace Research 37: 251–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermillion, Jim. 2006. “Problems in the Measurement of Democracy.” Democracy at Large 3(1): 26–30.Google Scholar
Vile, M.J.C. 1967/1998. Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers. Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Weale, Albert. 1999. Democracy. New York: St. Martin's Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Woodrow. 1956 [1885]. Congressional Government. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Wu, Lawrence L. 2000. “Some Comments on ‘Sequence Analysis and Optimal Matching Methods in Sociology: Review and Prospect.’” Sociological Methods and Research 29(1): 41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 247
Total number of PDF views: 5704 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

237 Cited by
Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-2crfx Total loading time: 0.415 Render date: 2021-01-21T05:26:16.233Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *