Measuring Polyarchy

  • Michael Coppedge
  • Wolfgang H. Reinicke
On Measuring Democracy

Abstract

The authors have developed a scale based on Robert Dahl’s concept of polyarchy. The scale measures the degree to which national political systems meet the minimum requirements for political democracy, where real-world “democracies” rather than abstract ideals are the, standard. The Polyarchy Scale is constructed from indicators of freedom of expression, freedom of organization, media pluralism, and the holding of fair elections. The scale is (1) well grounded in democratic theory, (2) world-wide in scope., (3) demonstrably valid, (4) solves problems of weighting indicators and (5) is easy to interpret and replicate., Some limitations in the scale's applicability are discussed and suggestions are made for improvements and future research.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ALEXANDER, ROBERT J., ed. 1982Political parties of the Americas: Canada, Latin America, and the West Indies. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  2. BANKS, ARTHUR S., ed. 1985Political handbook of the world. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  3. BANKS, ARTHUR S. and ROBERT B. TEXTOR 1963A cross-polity survey. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  4. BOLLEN, KENNETH A. 1988 Political democracy: Conceptual and measurement traps, paper prepared for conference on “The Measurement of Democracy” held at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, May 27–28, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. 0 1980 Issues in the comparative measurement of political democracy.American Sociological Review 45 (June): 370–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DAHL, ROBERT A. 1971Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  7. 0 1982Dilemmas of pluralist democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. DAHL, ROBERT A. and CHARLES LINDBLOM 1953Politics, economics, and welfare. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  9. DELURY, GEORGE E. ed. 1983World encyclopedia of political systems and parties. Harlow, Essex, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
  10. DEPARTMENT OF STATE See United States GovernmentGoogle Scholar
  11. DUNN-RANKIN PETER 1983Scaling methods. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. EUROPA 1986The Europa yearbook. London: Europa Publications.Google Scholar
  13. 0 1986aSouth America, Central America and the Caribbean. London: Europa Publications.Google Scholar
  14. 0 1986bThe Far East and Australasia. London: Europa Publications.Google Scholar
  15. 0 1986cAfrica south of the Sahara. London: Europa Publications.Google Scholar
  16. 0 1986dThe Middle East and North Africa: A survey and directory of the countries of the Middle East. London: Europa Publications.Google Scholar
  17. FUKUI, HARUHIRO, ed. 1985Political parties of Asia and the Pacific. Westport, CT: Greenwood PressGoogle Scholar
  18. GASTIL, RAYMOND L 1986Freedom in the world: Political rights and civil liberties, 1985–1986. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  19. GORDEN, RAYMOND L. 1977Unidimensional scaling of social variables: Concepts and procedures. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  20. HUMANA, CHARLES 1986World human rights guide. New York: Facts on File.Google Scholar
  21. McHALE, VINCENT E., ed. 1983Political parties of Europe. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  22. McIVER, JOHN P. and EDWARD G. CARMINES 1981Unidimensional scaling. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. NUNNALLY, JUM C. 1967Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  24. PHILLIPS, CLAUDE S. 1984The African political dictionary. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-Clio.Google Scholar
  25. The statesman's year-book 1986Statistical and historical annual of the states of the world. London and New York: Macmillan, St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
  26. United States Government, Department of State 1986Country reports on human rights practices for 1985. Washington: United States Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  27. Watch Committees, The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights 1986Critique: Review of the Department of State's country reports on human rights. New York: Fund for Free Expression for the Watch Committees and the Watch Committees and the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Coppedge
  • Wolfgang H. Reinicke

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations