This article updates and describes a widely used data set on democracy. Covering 1800–2007 and 219 countries, it represents the most comprehensive dichotomous measure of democracy currently available. We argue that our measure’s distinguishing features—a concrete, dichotomous coding and a long time span—are of critical value to empirical work on democracy. Inspired by Robert Dahl, we define a country as democratic if it satisfies conditions for both contestation and participation. Specifically, democracies feature political leaders chosen through free and fair elections and satisfy a threshold value of suffrage. After comparing our coding to that of other popular measures, we illustrate how democracy’s predictive factors have evolved since 1800. In particular, we show that economic modernization variables have steadily declined in their correlation with democracy over time.
AcemogluDaronJohnsonSimonRobinsonJames A. (2001). The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation. American Economic Review, 91, 1369-1401.
2.
AcemogluDaronJohnsonSimonRobinsonJames A.YaredPierre. (2009). Reevaluating the modernization hypothesis. Journal of Monetary Economics, 56, 1043-1058.
3.
AltmanDavidPérez-LiñánAníbal. (2002). Assessing the quality of democracy: Freedom, competitiveness and participation in eighteen Latin American countries. Democratization, 9(2), 85-100.
4.
AlvarezMikeCheibubJosé AntonioLimongiFernandoPrzeworskiAdam. (1996). Classifying political regimes. Studies in Comparative International Development, 31(2), 3-36.
5.
AnsellBenSamuelsDavid. (2010). Inequality and democratization: A contractarian approach. Comparative Political Studies, 43(12), 1543-1574.
6.
AratZehra F. (1991). Democracy and human rights in developing countries. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
7.
BanksArthur S. (1976). Cross-national time series, 1815–1973. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.
8.
BarroRobert J. (1996). Democracy and growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 1(1), 1-27.
9.
BeckNathanielKatzJonathan N.TuckerRichard. (1998). Taking time seriously: Time-series cross-section analysis with a binary dependent variable. American Journal of Political Science, 42(4), 1260-1288.
10.
BeckThorstenClarkeGeorgeGroffAlbertoKeeferPhilipWalshPatrick. (2001). New tools in comparative political economy: The Database of Political Institutions. World Bank Economic Review, 15(1), 165-176.
11.
BermanSheri. (2007). How democracies emerge: Lessons from Europe. Journal of Democracy, 18(1), 28-41.
12.
BlausteinAlbert P.FlanzGisbert H. (various years). Constitutions of the Countries of the World. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications.
13.
BogaardsMatthijs. (2010). Measures of democratization: From degree to type to war. Political Research Quarterly, 63(2), 475-488.
14.
BoixCarles. (2003). Democracy and redistribution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15.
BoixCarles. (2011). Democracy, development and the international system. American Political Science Review, 105(4), 809-828.
16.
BoixCarlesStokesSusan C. (2003). Endogenous democratization. World Politics, 55, 517-549.
17.
BollenKenneth A. (1980). Issues in the comparative measurement of political democracy. American Sociological Review, 45, 370-390.
18.
BollenKenneth A. (1993). Liberal democracy: Validity and method factors in cross-national measures. American Journal of Political Science, 37(4), 1207-1230.
19.
BollenKenneth A. (1998). Cross-national indicators of liberal democracy, 1950–1990 (ICPSR02532-v2). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina.
20.
BollenKenneth A.GrandjeanBurke D. (1981). The dimension(s) of democracy: Further issues in the measurement and effects of political democracy. American Sociological Review, 46, 651-659.
21.
BollenKenneth A.JackmanRobert W. (1989). Democracy, stability, and dichotomies. American Sociological Review, 54(4), 612-621.
22.
BollenKenneth A.PaxtonPamela. (2000). Subjective measures of liberal democracy. Comparative Political Studies, 33(1), 58-86.
23.
BowmanKirkLehoucqFabriceMahoneyJames. (2005). Measuring political democracy: Case expertise, data adequacy, and Central America. Comparative Political Studies, 38, 939-970.
24.
BrennerSaulHagleTimothy M.SpaethHarold J. (1990). Increasing the size of minimum winning original coalitions on the Warren Court. Polity, 23, 309-318.
25.
BrinksDanielCoppedgeMichael. (2006). Diffusion is no illusion: Neighbor emulation in the Third Wave of democracy. Comparative Political Studies, 39(4), 463-489.
26.
CarothersThomas. (1999). Aiding democracy abroad: The learning curve. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
27.
CasperGretchenTufisClaudiu. (2003). Correlation versus interchangeability: The limited robustness of empirical findings on democracy using highly correlated data sets. Political Analysis, 11, 196-203.
28.
CheibubJosé AntonioGandhiJenniferVreelandJames Raymond. (2010). Democracy and dictatorship revisited. Public Choice, 143, 67-101.
29.
CollierDavidAdcockRobert. (1999). Democracy and dichotomies: A pragmatic approach to choices about concepts. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 537-565.
30.
CollierDavidLevitskySteven. (1997). Democracy with adjectives: Conceptual innovation in comparative research. World Politics, 49(3), 430-451.
31.
CoppedgeMichaelAlvarezAngelMaldonadoClaudia. (2008). Two persistent dimensions of democracy: Contestation and inclusiveness. Journal of Politics, 70(3), 632-647.
32.
CoppedgeMichaelGerringJohnAltmanDavidBernhardMichaelFishStevenHickenAllenTeorellJan. (2011). Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: A new approach. Perspectives on Politics, 9(2), 247-257.
33.
CoppedgeMichaelReinickeWolfgang H. (1990). Measuring polyarchy. Studies in Comparative International Development, 25(1), 51-72.
34.
CutrightPhillips. (1963). National political development: Measurement and analysis. American Sociological Review, 28(2), 253-264.
35.
CutrightPhillipsWileyJames A. (1969). Modernization and political representation: 1927–1966. Studies in Comparative International Development, 5(2), 23-43.
36.
DahlRobert A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
37.
DeiningerKlausSquireLyn. (1996). A new data set measuring income inequality. World Bank Economic Review, 10(3), 565-591.
38.
DeutschKarl W. (1961). Social mobilization and political development. American Political Science Review, 55(3), 493-510.
39.
DiamondJared. (1998). Guns, germs and steel: The fates of human societies. New York, NY: Norton.
40.
DiamondLarry. (2002). Thinking about hybrid regimes. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 21-35.
41.
DiamondLarryLinzJuan J.LipsetSeymour Martin. (1990). Politics in developing countries: Comparing experiences with democracy. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
42.
EasterlyWilliamLevineRoss. (2003). Tropics, germs, and crops: How endowments influence economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 50(1), 3-39.
43.
ElkinsZachary. (2000). Gradations of democracy? Empirical tests of alternative conceptualizations. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 293-300.
44.
FearonJames D.LaitinDavid. (2003). Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. American Political Science Review, 97(1), 75-91.
45.
Freedom House. (2010). Freedom in the world 2010: The annual survey of political rights and civil liberties. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
46.
GasiorowskiMark J. (1996). An overview of the political regime change dataset. Comparative Political Studies, 29(4), 469-483.
47.
GatesScottHegreHåvardJonesMark P.StrandHåvard. (2006). Institutional inconsistency and political instability: Polity duration, 1800–2000. American Journal of Political Science, 50(4), 893-908.
48.
GerringJohn. (2008). Measuring democracy: Proposal for a disaggregated approach. Working paper.
49.
GerringJohnBondPhilipBarndtWilliam T.MorenoCarola. (2005). Democracy and economic growth: A historical perspective. World Politics, 57, 323-364.
50.
GiddensAnthony. (1998). The third way: The renewal of social democracy. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
51.
GleditschKristen S. (2002). Expanded trade and GDP data. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46, 712-724.
52.
GleditschKristian S.WardMichael D. (1997). Double take: A reexamination of democracy and autocracy in modern polities. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41(3), 361-383.
53.
GleditschKristian S.WardMichael D. (2006). Diffusion and the international context of democratization. International Organization, 60, 911-933.
54.
GolderMatt. (2005). Democratic electoral systems around the world, 1946–2000. Electoral Studies, 24, 103-121.
55.
GowaJoanne. (2011). The democratic peace after the cold war. Economics and Politics, 23, 153-171.
56.
HaberStephenMenaldoVictor. (2011). Do natural resources fuel authoritarianism? A reappraisal of the resource curse. American Political Science Review, 105(1), 1-26.
57.
HadeniusAxelTeorellJan. (2007). Pathways from authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 18(1), 143-156.
58.
HagleTimothy M.MitchellGlenn E.(1992). Goodness-of-fit measures for probit and logit. American Journal of Political Science, 36(3), 762-784.
59.
HuntingtonSamuel P. (1991). The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
60.
KeeferPhilip. (2005). Database of political institutions: Changes and variable definitions. Washington, DC: World Bank, Development Research Group.
61.
La PortaRafaelLopez-de-SilanesFlorencioShleiferAndreiVishnyRobert. (1999). The quality of government. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 15(1), 222-279.
62.
LevitskyStevenWayLucan A. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the cold war. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
63.
LinzJuan J.StepanAlfred. (1996). Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
64.
LipsetSeymour Martin. (1959). Some social requisites of democracy. American Political Science Review, 53, 69-105.
65.
López GuerraLuisAguiar de LuqueLuis. (2001). Las Constituciones de Iberoamérica [[The constitutions of Latin America]]. Madrid, Spain: Madrid Bar Association.
66.
MaddisonAngus. (2008). Statistics on world population, GDP and per capita GDP, 1–2006 AD. Retrieved from www.ggdc.net/maddison
67.
MainwaringScottBrinksDanielPérez-LiñánAníbal. (2007). Classifying political regimes in Latin America, 1945–2004. In MunckGerardo L. (Ed.), Regimes and democracy in Latin America: Theories and methods (pp. 123-160). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
68.
MansfieldEdwardSnyderJack. (2005). Electing to fight: Why emerging democracies go to war. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
69.
MarshallMonty G.JaggersKeith. (2010). Polity IV Project: Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800–2009. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University, Center for Systemic Peace.
70.
McKoyMichael K.MillerMichael K. (2012). The patron’s dilemma: The dynamics of foreign-supported democratization. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(5), 905-932.
71.
MillerMichael K. (2012). Democratic pieces: Hybrid regimes and disaggregated democracy. Working paper.
72.
MitchellBrian R. (1975). European historical statistics, 1750–1970. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
73.
MooreBarrington. (1966). Social origins of dictatorship and democracy. Boston, MA: Beacon.
74.
MullerEdward N. (1988). Democracy, economic development, and income inequality. American Sociological Review, 53(1), 50-68.
75.
MunckGerardo L.VerkuilenJay. (2002). Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: Evaluating alternative indices. Comparative Political Studies, 35, 5-34.
OlssonOlaHibbsDouglas A. (2005). Biogeography and long-run economic development. European Economic Review, 49, 909-938.
78.
PaxtonPamela. (2000). Women’s suffrage in the measurement of democracy: Problems of operationalization. Studies in Comparative International Development, 35(3), 92-111.
79.
PaxtonPamelaBollenKenneth A.LeeDeborah M.KimHyoJoung. (2003). A half-century of suffrage: New data and a comparative analysis. Studies in Comparative International Development, 38(1), 93-122.
80.
PemsteinDanielMeserveStephenMeltonJames. (2010). Democratic compromise: A latent variable analysis of ten measures of regime type. Political Analysis, 18, 426-449.
81.
PerssonTorstenTabelliniGuido. (2009). Democratic capital: The nexus of political and economic change. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 1(2), 88-126.
82.
PrzeworskiAdamAlvarezMichael E.CheibubJosé A.LimongiFernando. (2000). Democracy and development: Political institutions and well-being in the world, 1950–1990. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
83.
PrzeworskiAdamLimongiFernando. (1997). Modernization: Theories and facts. World Politics, 49(2), 155-183.
84.
RoederPhilip G. (2001). Ethnolinguistic fractionalization (ELF) indices, 1961 and 1985. Retrieved from weber.ucsd.edu/~proeder/elf.htm
85.
RossMichael. (2006). Is democracy good for the poor?American Journal of Political Science, 50(4), 860-874.
86.
SartoriGiovanni. (1987). The theory of democracy revisited. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
87.
SchedlerAndreas (Ed.). (2006). Electoral authoritarianism: The dynamics of unfree competition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
88.
SchumpeterJoseph A. (1950). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Bros. (Original work published 1942)
89.
StarrHarveyLindborgChristina. (2003). Democratic dominoes revisited: The hazards of governmental transitions, 1974–1996. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 47, 490-519.
90.
TreierShawnJackmanSimon. (2008). Democracy as a latent variable. American Journal of Political Science, 52(1), 201-217.
91.
United Nations Development Programme. (2004). Human development report 2004: Cultural liberty in today’s diverse world. New York, NY: Author.
92.
VanhanenTatu. (2003). Democratization and power resources 1850–2000 (FSD1216, Version 1.0, 2003-03-10). Tampere: Finnish Social Science Data Archive.
93.
VanhanenTatu. (2005). Measures of democracy, 1810–2004 (FSD1289, Version 2.0, 2005-08-17). Tampere: Finnish Social Science Data Archive.
94.
VreelandJames Raymond. (2008). The effect of political regime on civil war: Unpacking anocracy. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52(3), 401-425.
95.
WelzelChristianInglehartRonald. (2006). Emancipative values and democracy: Response to Hadenius and Teorell. Studies in Comparative International Development, 41(3), 74-94.
96.
World Bank. (2008). World development indicators online. Retrieved from www.worldbank.org/data
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
