GLOBAL INDICES FOR DEMOCRACY

2. Significance of Democracy Indices to India

• Challenges to Global Rating Assessments: India has consistently rejected global rating assessments across multiple domains, including democracy, press freedom, hunger, human development, and happiness. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar, in 2021, denounced the creators of these indices as "self-appointed custodians," suggesting they might have ulterior motives rather than being objective evaluators.
• Critique of Democracy Assessments: The criticism against democracy assessments primarily revolves around perceived flaws in methodology, inadequate sample sizes, and allegations of cultural bias favouring subjective opinions over objective metrics. India's positioning in these indices, such as being ranked between Niger, governed by a military junta, and the Ivory Coast, as well as being in the same category as Palestine, raises questions about the validity and fairness of these assessments.
• India's Defense of Democratic Standards: Despite these challenges, Mr Jaishankar argues that any benchmark of democracy, whether it's fair elections or electoral participation, would suggest that India is performing on par with other democracies. This defence aims to showcase India's democratic credentials and challenge the negative portrayal presented by these indices.

3. Types of Data Utilized by Indices

Indices measuring democracy employ various methodologies, incorporating both factual and subjective elements. They draw upon four main types of data:

Debate Over Methodological Approaches: While the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights advocates for prioritizing observational, objective data to enhance the credibility and acceptance of assessments, some argue that fact-based metrics alone are insufficient. They contend that expert intervention is necessary to capture the complex realities of governance on the ground.

Evaluation Criteria and Dimensions of Democracy: Different indices pose varying questions and dimensions to evaluate the health of democracy beyond electoral participation. While all recognize democracy as a system where citizens participate in free and fair elections, indices like V-Dem's, Economist Intelligence Unit, and the Bertelsmann Transformation Index assess additional dimensions. These include:

• Participatory Democracy: Evaluating the functionality of citizen groups and civil society organizations.
• Deliberative Decision-Making: Assessing whether decisions are made in the best interest of all citizens rather than through coercion or minority group interests.
• Egalitarianism: Examining the equal distribution of economic and social resources.

Methodological Variations: The approach to measuring democracy varies widely among indices, with differences in the number of indicators used (ranging from two to over 400), as well as in the assigned weightage and aggregation models. For example, V-Dem researchers code indicators across 12 areas, including media, civil society, political parties, and civil liberties, with each area assessed by five experts.

4. Limitations of Democracy Indices

Despite their utility in capturing broad trends in democracy, democracy indices are subject to several limitations:

• Subjectivity in Evaluation: One of the most common criticisms is the inherent subjectivity involved in the assessment process. Evaluations rely on the judgment of researchers and coders rather than concrete characteristics, which can undermine credibility and precision. For example, V-Dem's "egalitarian" indicator evaluates the equality of social groups in the political arena, which can be a subjective measure compared to more tangible indicators like the number of political parties.
• Scope of Coverage: Many indices have limited coverage, focusing primarily on independent states and overlooking non-independent or microstates. This omission can lead to the oversight of smaller countries in certain cases, affecting the comprehensiveness of the assessments.
• Ideological Discrepancy: There is often perceived ideological bias in some indices, partly due to the ambiguous definition of democracy itself. For instance, countries like Lesotho, which experienced a military coup in 2014, may receive higher scores than others like India, leading to discrepancies in rankings.

No Singular Definition or Index: Democracy is a complex concept with no universally agreed-upon definition. Similarly, there is no singular, perfect democracy index. Each index may emphasize different aspects of democracy and use varied methodologies, making direct comparisons challenging.

Acknowledgement of Utility: Despite these limitations, experts recognize that democracy indices play a valuable role in capturing significant dynamics and trends in democracy. They provide a framework for benchmarking the strengths and weaknesses of regimes, facilitating comparisons across different periods and geographical regions.

5. The Way Forward