Foreign Credit Rating. 9. Welfare ...... Poor's credit ratings ex- press the agency's opinion about the ability and willingness of an issuer, such as a corporation or.
CORRELATES OF DEMOCRACY SÖREN HOLMBERG BO ROTHSTEIN
WORKING PAPER SERIES 2011:10 QOG THE QUALITY OF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTE Department of Political Science University of Gothenburg Box 711, SE 405 30 GÖTEBORG October 2011 ISSN 1653-8919 © 2011 by Sören Holmberg and Bo Rothstein. All rights reserved.
Content Economy GDP / Capita
4
Economic Equality (gini index)
5
Economic Freedom
6
GDP / Capita Growth
7
Population below $2 a Day (%)
8
Foreign Credit Rating
9
Welfare Human Development Index
10
Government Revenue (% of GDP)
11
Tax Revenue (% of GDP)
12
Social Security Laws
13
Average Schooling Years
14
Health Life Expectancy
15
Healthy Life Years
16
Infant Mortality Rate
17
Maternal Mortality Rate
18
Government Expenditure on Health (% of total health)
19
Private Expenditure on Health (% of total health)
20
Environment CO2 Emissions / Capita
21
Access to Improved Drinking Water
22
Access to Adequate Sanitation
23
Gender Gender Equality
24
Secondary Education Enrollment (female)
25
Crime Homicide Rate
26
Number of Police Officers
27
Number of Prisoners
28 2
Trust Interpersonal Trust
29
Confidence in Parliament (all countries)
30
Confidence in Parliament (democracies only)
31
Confidence in Government (all countries)
32
Confidence in Government (democracies only)
33
Happiness Feeling of Happiness
34
Life Satisfaction
35
Democracy Level of Democracy 2002 and 2009
36
Quality of Government Government Effectiveness
37
Control of Corruption
38
Description of Variables
39
3
GDP / Capita vs. Level of Democracy Luxembourg
Qatar
25000
4
GDP / Capita
50000
High
Kuwait
Turkmenistan
Bahrain Oman Belarus Kazakhstan
0
Vietnam North Korea
0 Low
1
2
Malaysia Gabon Cambodia
3
4
5
Venezuela
Armenia Bosnia
Den Swe Fin
Romania Tuvalu
Bangladesh
Mali
7
8
6
Level of Democracy
USA
Japan Israel Taiwan Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Trinidad Seychelles Uruguay Russia
Cameroon Gambia
R²=0.16 Sources: Gleditsch (2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Monaco
Singapore
Brunei
Saudi Arabia
Low
Norway
United Arab Emirates
Mongolia
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Economic Equality vs. Level of Democracy
Low
80 70
Bosnia Belarus
60
Uzbekistan Turkmenistan
Ethiopia Tanzania
Togo
Azerbaijan
Russia
Cambodia
China
Dem. Rep. Congo
50
Albania Ukraine
Zimbabwe
Netherlands Armenia Montenegro Indonesia
Israel Thailand Philippines
Turkey Niger Central African Republic Venezuela
Swaziland
Can USA
Uruguay Sao Tome
Honduras Peru Haiti Angola
40
Hungary
Denmark Swe
Paraguay
Colombia
Ecuador
Comoros
Bolivia
Belize
30
5
Economic Equality (Reversed Gini-index)
High
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Level of Democracy
9
10 High
R²=0.01 Sources: World Development Indicators (1995-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Economic Freedom vs. Level of Democracy
High
80
Bahrain Madagascar Cambodia Armenia Jordan Qatar Oman Malaysia Saudi Arabia Pakistan China Russia Turkmenistan Ethiopia Haiti Sierra Leone Iran Congo Belarus Bosnia Zimbabwe Cuba
Low
Peru
Slovenia
Romania Suriname
Serbia
North Korea
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.37 Sources: Heritage Foundation (2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
New Zealand Estonia USA Swe El Salvador Japan Israel
20
40
60
United Arab Emirates
0
6
Economic Freedom
Singapore
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
GDP / Capita Growth vs. Level of Democracy
20
Sierra Leone
10
Turkmenistan
Equatorial Guinea
China Belarus
0
Armenia Tajikistan Bahrain
Zimbabwe
-10
Ukraine Tanzania Russia
Dem. Rep. Congo
Saudi Arabia Eritrea
Iraq
Sao Tome Trinidad and Tobago Moldova
Ethiopia
Swe USA
Nigeria
Gambia Guinea-Bissau
Senegal
Israel Japan Palau Dominica
Venezuela
Vanuatu
Argentina
Uruguay
Madagascar
-20
7
GDP / Capita Growth
High
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Level of Democracy
9
10 High
R²=0.01 Sources: World Development Indicators (2002-2005), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
(N.B. The data for GDP / Capita growth is for a single year only)
Population Below $2 a Day vs. Level of Democracy
100
High
80
Tanzania
Liberia
Rwanda
60 40 20
Colombia Argentina
Algeria
Egypt
Tunisia
Iran
Belarus
2
4
Malaysia Russia
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.19 Sources: World Bank (1995-2007), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Sao Tome
South Africa Philippines Mongolia
Djibouti Georgia
Mauritania
Low
Papua New Guinea Armenia
Turkmenistan
0
India
Comoros
Gambia
China
Mali
Sierra Leone
Pakistan Cambodia
Low
Mozambique Bangladesh
Burkina Faso
Uzbekistan
0
8
Population Below $2 a Day (%)
Brazil
Panama
Albania
Uruguay
Serbia
Slovenia
8
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Foreign Credit Rating vs. Level of Democracy
10
Singapore
6
8
Saudi Arabia China
Qatar
Kuwait
Oman
Malaysia
Tunisia
Russia
Vietnam
Egypt
Cameroon Cambodia
Venezuela Uganda
Israel Colombia
Thailand
Fiji
Japan USA
India
Brazil
Turkey
Uruguay
Georgia Zambia Albania Ukraine Argentina
Cape Verde
Jamaica
Kenya
4
Belarus
Nor Swe
Greece
2
9
Foreign Credit Rating
High
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
Level of Democracy
R²=0.13 Sources: Standard & Poor's (2011), Freedom House/Polity (2009)
6
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Human Development Index vs. Level of Democracy
1
Japan Singapore
.8
Bahrain Qatar Saudi Arabia
Iran
Vietnam
.6
Malaysia
Kazakhstan Maldives Egypt
Morocco
SwazilandCameroon
.4
Rwanda
Burundi
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
Lesotho
Mozambique Mali Burkina Faso Sierra Leone
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.22 Sources: UNDP (2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Sao Tome Vanuatu
Ghana
Nigeria
Gambia
Dem. Rep. Congo
Bangladesh
Cape Verde
Bolivia
Solomon Islands Cambodia
Eritrea
Albania
Lebanon
Gabon
Myanmar
Seychelles Russia
Israel Estonia
Argentina
Norway Swe USA
.2
10
Human Development Index
High
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Government Revenue vs. Level of Democracy 50
Norway
Kuwait
Qatar
BotswanaBelgium
40
Algeria
Seychelles
30
Bosnia Jordan
Swaziland Egypt
Yemen
20
Syria
Russia
Macedonia Ukraine
Malaysia
Estonia Namibia
Lebanon
10
Cambodia Dem. Rep. Congo
Iceland
Mauritius USA Bahamas
Laos
Kazakhstan Afghanistan
Swe
Romania Honduras Thailand
Venezuela Cote d'Ivoire
Israel
India
Bangladesh
Brazil
Myanmar
0
11
Government Revenue (% of GDP)
High
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Level of Democracy
9
10 High
R²=0.14 Sources: World Development Indicators (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Tax Revenue vs. Level of Democracy 40
High
30
Algeria
Denmark
Swaziland Zimbabwe
20
Qatar
Syria
Seychelles
Armenia
Iran
0
Bahrain Myanmar United Arab Emirates Kuwait
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
Russia
Central African Republic
6
Poland
Albania
Argentina Madagascar Panama
Cambodia Georgia
5
Swe
Macedonia
Zambia Malaysia Kenya
Belarus
China
Israel Jamaica
Namibia
Fiji
Tunisia Morocco Jordan Burkina Faso
10
12
Tax Revenue (% of GDP)
LesothoBarbados
USA
Brazil
7
8
Level of Democracy
9
10 High
R²=0.19 Sources: World Development Indicators (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Social Security Laws Index vs. Level of Democracy Denmark
.8
Russia Kyrgyzstan Tunisia
Armenia
Vietnam
Israel
Argentina Ecuador
Japan
Morocco Pakistan
Singapore
Turkey
.4
Nigeria Kazakhstan Jordan Zimbabwe Uganda
.2 Low
Brazil Mexico
Swe
USA
South Africa
Georgia
Malaysia
Bolivia Kenya Indonesia Ghana
Tanzania
Jamaica
Malawi
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.19 Sources: Botero et al (1997-2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Colombia Venezuela
.6
China Egypt
0
13
Social Security Laws Index
High
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Average Schooling Years vs. Level of Democracy
15 10
South Korea Singapore Jordan
5
Syria
China
Italy Mexico Guyana Mauritius El Salvador Portugal
Zambia Iran
Iraq
Zimbabwe
Myanmar Haiti Afghanistan
Low
0 Low
Dem. Rep. Congo Central African Republic
Malawi
Gambia
Papua New Guinea Senegal Niger
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.38 Sources: Barro & Lee (2000), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Fiji Ecuador
Malaysia
Kuwait Bahrain
USA Canada Swe Australia Japan
Argentina Taiwan Israel
Mali
0
14
Average Schooling Years
High
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Life Expectancy at Birth vs. Level of Democracy
70
80
High
60
Uzbekistan
Haiti
50 Low
1
Ethiopia
Nigeria
3
Madagascar Malawi
Sierra Leone Zambia
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.19 Sources: World Bank (2000-2006), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Senegal
Kenya Mozambique
Angola
4
India
Kiribati
Benin
Zimbabwe
2
Thailand Mongolia Bangladesh
Djibouti Burundi
Swaziland Rwanda Afghanistan
Ukraine
Comoros Gabon Cambodia
Cameroon
0
Russia
Tajikistan Pakistan
Eritrea
Low
Lebanon Iran
Azerbaijan
Myanmar
San Marino Japan Swe Israel Ger Antigua and Barbuda USA Estonia Brazil
Singapore Bosnia and Herzegovina
United Arab Emirates Kuwait Cuba Bahrain Saudi A. China
40
15
Life Expectancy at Birth (Years)
7
South Africa
Botswana
Mali
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Healthy Life Years vs. Level of Democracy
70 60 50
Kuwait Bahrain Brunei
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.21 Sources: WHO (-), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Japan Swe Nor USA
Bosnia and Herzegovina Argentina Georgia Malaysia Macedonia LebanonArmenia Maldives Iran Russia Honduras Mongolia Tajikistan Bangladesh Tuvalu Papua New Guinea Iraq Gambia Cambodia Senegal Laos Djibouti Haiti Kenya South Africa Equatorial Guinea Nigeria Cameroon Chad Ethiopia Tanzania Rwanda MozambiqueMali Afghanistan Botswana Liberia Burundi Swaziland Zimbabwe Angola Lesotho Sierra Leone
S. ArabiaSyriaChina Belarus Egypt Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Pakistan
40 Low
Israel South Korea Croatia
Singapore
Cuba
30
16
Healthy Life Years
80
High
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Infant Mortality vs. Level of Democracy
200
High
100
150
Afghanistan Sierra Leone
Angola Dem. Rep. Congo Liberia
Rwanda
Equatorial Guinea
Cameroon Swaziland
50
Uzbekistan Iraq Saudi Arabia China
Low
0 Low
Comoros
Iran Solomon Islands
Lesotho
Bangladesh
India
Malaysia Singapore
Brunei
4
Seychelles
6
Level of Democracy
Sao Tome
Kiribati South Africa Marshall Isl.
Georgia
R²=0.22 Sources: World Bank (2000-2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Timor-Leste
Namibia
Tunisia
2
Malawi Djibouti
Morocco
Cuba
Mozambique Mali Central African Republic
Gambia
Turkmenistan
0
17
Infant Mortality (per 1000 live births)
Montenegro S. Korea Sweden
8
USA
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Maternal Mortality Ratio vs. Level of Democracy
Low
500 1000 1500 2000
Afghanistan Central African Republic Malawi Chad
Cameroon
Eritrea
China
Tunisia
Saudi Arabia
0 Low
Mozambique Gambia
Myanmar
2
Timor-Leste
EthiopiaGuinea-Bissau
Rwanda Equatorial Guinea
Burkina Faso
Mali Namibia
Armenia
Botswana
Senegal
Bangladesh
Guyana
Nepal Tajikistan Malaysia Iran
4
Lesotho
Sierra Leone
Liberia
Iraq
0
18
Maternal Mortality Ratio (per 100,000 live births)
High
Albania
6
8
Level of Democracy
India
Sao Tome Vanuatu USA Sweden
10 High
R²=0.12 Sources: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation - University of Washington (2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Government Expenditure on Health (% of total health)
Government Expenditure on Health vs. Level of Democracy
Angola Gabon
Saudi Arabia
Swaziland
40
Zambia Russia
Lesotho
Jamaica Mexico
Iran
20
Iraq
Myanmar
USA Uruguay
Lebanon Pakistan
Swe
Bangladesh Dominican Republic India Georgia
Burundi Dem. Rep. Congo
0
19
Syria
GuyanaJapan
Colombia
Tonga
Ethiopia
Kazakhstan
Afghanistan
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.15 Sources: WHO (2001-2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Marshall Islands Czech Republic
Solomon Islands
Cuba North Korea
60
80
100
High
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Private Expenditure on Health vs. Level of Democracy 100
Afghanistan
80
Iraq
Myanmar
Azerbaijan Pakistan
Burundi
60 40
Libya
Low
Russia Zambia Djibouti
Ethiopia
Bahrain
Low
1
2
3
4
5
R²=0.15 Sources: WHO (2001-2002), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Latvia
Lesotho Namibia
Israel
South Africa USA Bulgaria Neth Aus
Guyana Swe Japan Colombia Papua New Guinea Slovakia Solomon Islands Marshall Islands
6
Level of Democracy
Mexico
Malawi Tonga
Gabon Angola
Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates North Korea Cuba
0
Bangladesh Dominican Republic Uruguay
Ukraine
Kazakhstan Belarus
India
Lebanon Cent. Afr. Rep. Ecuador
Iran
Somalia
Georgia
Nigeria
China Swaziland
20
Dem. Rep. Congo
0
20
Private Expenditure on Health (% of total health)
High
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Carbon Dioxide Emissions vs. Level of Democracy 60
Qatar
Equatorial Guinea
Djibouti
Solomon Islands Comoros
Belize
Guyana
Fiji
40
Timor-Leste Swaziland Brunei
20
Turkmenistan Bhutan Saudi Arabia
Mauritania
Low
0 Low
Gambia
2
Russia
Dem. Rep. Congo Ethiopia
Egypt
1
Guinea-Bissau
Malaysia
Belarus Iraq
Mauritius Bolivia
Kazakhstan
0
21
Carbon Dioxide Emissions (Tons per Capita)
High
3
4
5
Australia USA Trinidad and Tobago Iceland Japan Swe
Brazil Argentina Ukraine SerbiaIsrael
Bosnia Tanzania
6
Costa Rica
7
8
Level of Democracy
9
10 High
R²=0.00 Sources: Environmental Performance Index (2000-2005), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Access to Improved Drinking Water (%) vs. Level of Democracy
Low
N. Korea
Belarus Bahrain Cuba
80
Singapore
Iraq
Kazakhstan
Morocco
China
60
Cameroon Eritrea
40
Laos Afghanistan
IranMalaysia
Tunisia
Gambia
Liberia
Russia
Senegal
Sao Tome Kiribati
Timor-Leste
Romania
Mali Niger
Mozambique
Somalia Ethiopia
0 Low
2
4
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.18 Sources: Esty et al / WHO (2004), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
India
Georgia Bangladesh Djibouti Guinea-Bissau
Sweden USA
Turkey Thailand
Comoros
Guinea Dem. Rep. Congo Chad Cambodia
20
22
Access to Improved Drinking Water (%)
100
High
8
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Access to Adequate Sanitation vs. Level of Democracy Brunei
Qatar United Arab Emirates
North Korea
Cameroon Swaziland Rwanda
Israel Sweden Trinidad and Tobago USA Bosnia Thailand Tuvalu Sri Lanka Chile Georgia Russia Serbia Dominican Republic
Singapore
Tunisia Belarus Saudi Arabia Myanmar Egypt Vietnam Pakistan
40
60
80
100
High
Iran
Malawi Tajikistan
Tanzania
Burundi
Mauritania Laos
20
Central African Republic
South Africa Romania Vanuatu
Nicaragua Kiribati
Mozambique Solomon Islands Ghana
Cambodia Burkina Faso Niger
Chad
Eritrea
El Salvador Indonesia
Sao Tome
0
23
Access to Adequate Sanitation (%)
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Level of Democracy
9
10 High
R²=0.16 Sources: Environmental Performance Index (2004-), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Gender Equality vs. Level of Democracy
High
Sri Lanka
.7
Cuba
Belarus
.6
Uzbekistan China United Arab Emirates Syria Saudi Arabia
Tanzania
Kazakhstan Uganda
Pakistan
Malaysia
Kuwait
Bangladesh
Angola Morocco
Moldova
Russia Ukraine
Burkina Faso
Nepal
Turkey
Iceland Philippines Latvia Israel
USA Lux
Japan NicaraguaS. Korea India Benin
.5
24
Gender Equality
.8
Sweden
.4
Yemen
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.31 Sources: World Economic Forum (2005), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Secondary Education Enrollment (Female) vs. Level of Democracy
200
High
150
Belgium Swe Monaco Australia Finland Den
100
Libya Belarus Saudi Arabia
Iran Malaysia
Tunisia
0 Low
Thailand
Maldives
Iraq
Low
Russia
Zimbabwe Eritrea
Gambia Burundi
Afghanistan
2
Bangladesh
Gabon
4
Tanzania
6
Level of Democracy
India
Malawi
R²=0.27 Sources: UNESCO (1999-2009), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Seychelles Brazil Guyana Argentina
Tonga
Bahrain
50
China
0
25
Secondary Education Enrollment (Female)
USA Andorra Nauru Vanuatu
Mali Mozambique
8
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Homicide Rate vs. Level of Democracy 60
Colombia
South Africa
40
Russia Jamaica
Democratic Republic of the Congo
20
Sudan
Haiti
Central African Republic
Guatemala
Russia Zambia
Angola
Rwanda
Myanmar
Ethiopia
Mali
Saudi Arabia China Egypt
0 Low
1
2
Singapore
3
4
5
ArmeniaIndonesia
Tonga
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.01 Sources: UN Data (2010), Freedom House/Polity (2009)
Brazil Belize Bahamas Botswana
Comoros
Gambia
Low
El Salvador
Cote d'Ivoire
0
26
Homicide Rate (per 100,000 population)
High
7
Argentina Grenada
USA Swe Malta
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Number of Police Officers vs. Level of Democracy 1000 1500 2000
Bahrain
Brunei
Kuwait
500
Mauritius Qatar
Kazakhstan
Myanmar Syria Azerbaijan
Low
0 Low
1
2
Malaysia
Zambia Bangladesh
3
4
5
R²=0.02 Sources: UNODC (2000-2006), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
6
Level of Democracy
Cyprus Mexico Latvia Czech Republic Malta Albania USA Nor Swe Nicaragua India Chile Finland Venezuela
Lebanon Turkey Ukraine
Singapore
Maldives Nepal Jordan
Zimbabwe
0
27
Number of Police Officers (per 100,000 population)
High
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Number of Prisoners vs. Level of Democracy 600
Russia
400
USA
Belarus Kazakhstan
200
Kyrgyzstan Turkmenistan
Saudi Arabia Qatar
Azerbaijan
Egypt
Low
0 Low
1
2
Nepal
3
Georgia
4
Moldova
5
Czech Republic
Romania
6
Level of Democracy
South Africa Estonia
Zambia ArmeniaMacedonia Venezuela Bosnia and Herzegovina
R²=0.01 Sources: UNODC (2000-2006), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Ukraine
Singapore Malaysia
Bahrain
0
28
Number of Prisoners (per 100,000 population)
High
7
8
Mexico Swe Bolivia
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Interpersonal Trust vs. Level of Democracy
80
High
Norway Sweden
60
Iran
Finland
40
Saudi Arabia China Iraq Vietnam
Indonesia
Belarus Egypt
India Ukraine
20
Jordan Azerbaijan
Kyrgyzstan
Rwanda
Low
0 Low
Ethiopia
Russia Bosnia
Bangladesh
Tanzania
Uganda
Albania Serbia
Colombia
2
4
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.01 Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Australia Japan Austria
USA
Andorra Slovenia
Brazil Portugal Trinidad and Tobago
0
29
Most People Can Be Trusted (%)
8
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Confidence in Parliament vs. Level of Democracy
3 2.5
Vietnam
Rwanda
Tanzania
Uganda
2
China
Iran
1.5
Egypt
Bangladesh
Nigeria
Zimbabwe
Ethiopia
1
Bosnia
Japan
Guatemala
1
2
USA
Venezuela Serbia
Russia
Morocco
0
Swe
Thailand Algeria
Low
3
4
5
6
7
Level of Democracy
R²=0.15 Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
India
Indonesia
Belarus
Low
Iceland
Ghana
Malaysia
.5
30
Confidence in Parliament
High
8
Taiwan Macedonia
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Confidence in Parliament vs. Level of Democracy
2
Philippines
Mali
1.5
Albania
Zambia
Swe
South Africa USA
1
Turkey Venezuela El Salvador Georgia Latvia Colombia Armenia Argentina Guatemala
Low
Norway
India
Hungary
Poland
Taiwan
Macedonia
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Level of Democracy
R²=0.11 Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006) N.B. Only democracies (countries with a FreedomHouse/Polity rating above 6) are included. Bangladesh is also excluded.
Iceland
Ghana
.5
31
Confidence in Parliament
High
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Confidence in Government vs. Level of Democracy
3 2.5
Vietnam China
Azerbaijan
Jordan
Tanzania
Uganda
Bangladesh
2
Malaysia
Mali
Iran
1.5
Nigeria
Pakistan Kyrgyzstan
Russia
Ethiopia Bosnia
1
Iraq
India Switzerland Cyp Albania Nor Estonia Swe El Salvador Japan USA Serbia Ukraine Romania Argentina Poland
Indonesia
Morocco Algeria
Belarus
Macedonia
.5
32
Confidence in Government
High
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Level of Democracy
R²=0.22 Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Confidence in Government vs. Level of Democracy
2
Switzerland
1.5
Indonesia
AlbaniaIndia
1
Armenia Georgia
Cyp Nor
Estonia
Zambia
Swe
El Salvador Ukraine
USA Japan
Serbia
Romania Poland
Argentina
Dominican Republic Macedonia
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Level of Democracy
R²=0.00 Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006) N.B. Only democracies (countries with a FreedomHouse/Polity rating above 6) are included. Bangladesh is also excluded.
Mali
Ghana
.5
33
Confidence in Government
High
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Feeling of Happiness vs. Level of Democracy
Low
3.5
Nigeria Tanzania Saudi Arabia
El Salvador Venezuela Colombia
Vietnam Malaysia
Singapore
Indonesia
3
Egypt
Bosnia Uganda Jordan
China
Iraq
Iran
Belarus
Turkey Serbia
Ethiopia Bangladesh
2
Spain Italy
India
Slovenia Hungary
Serbia
4
6
Level of Democracy
Moldova
Estonia
Romania Bulgaria
Ukraine
R²=0.05 Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Argentina
Georgia
Russia
Low
And
Zimbabwe Armenia
0
Mexico Iceland Thailand USA Sweden
Ghana
2.5
34
Feeling of Happiness
High
8
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Life Satisfaction vs. Level of Democracy High Denmark Mexico Brazil Saudi Arabia
Argentina
7
Singapore Malaysia China
Kyrgyzstan
6 Iraq
Peru
Belarus
Zambia Bangladesh
Bosnia Ethiopia
Pakistan
USA Italy
Iran
Egypt
Sweden
Thailand
Nigeria
Morocco
5
35
Life Satisfaction
8
Colombia
Georgia Russia
Serbia
Japan
Slovakia Romania
India
Bulgaria
Moldova
4
Armenia
Low
Zimbabwe
0 Low
2
Tanzania
4
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.28 Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
8
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Level of Democracy 2009 vs. Level of Democracy 2002
10
Sweden USA
8
Ghana Brazil Ukraine
6
Maldives Kuwait
4
Bhutan
Qatar
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia China
Low
Equatorial Guinea
0 Low
1
2
Nepal Nigeria
Niger
India Philippines Thailand
Venezuela Madagascar
Ethiopia
Russia Angola Congo, Democratic Republic
Chad Somalia
3
4
5
6
7
Level of Democracy 2002
R²=0.88 Sources: Freedom House/Polity (2002), Freedom House/Polity (2009)
Bulgaria
Georgia Kenya
Gambia
Brunei Belarus
Liberia
Greece
Indonesia
Sierra Leone
Uganda
Rwanda
2
Iraq
0
36
Level of Democracy 2009
High
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Government Effectiveness vs. Level of Democracy
2
Singapore
Norway Swe USA France
-1
0
1
Taiwan Chile South Korea United Arab Emirates Malaysia Maldives BotswanaLatvia Bhutan Tunisia Qatar Antigua and Barbuda Oman Kuwait Namibia Fiji Jordan Senegal China Armenia Tanzania Saudi Arabia Russia Gabon Pakistan Guatemala Peru Iran Cuba Vietnam Malawi Tonga Gambia Nicaragua Belarus
Ethiopia Paraguay Haiti Central African Republic Turkmenistan Afghanistan Sierra Leone Burundi Somalia Congo, Democratic Republic Solomon Islands North Korea
-2
37
Government Effectiveness
High
Low
0 Low
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.34 Sources: World Bank (2002-2006), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
7
Slovenia Tuvalu Kiribati Monaco Nauru
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Control of Corruption vs. Level of Democracy Finland Singapore
2
Swe Belgium USA Chile
1
United Arab Emirates Kuwait Qatar Oman Bahrain
Antigua and Barbuda
-1 0
High Corruption Low
Botswana Korea, South
Bhutan
Tunisia Mauritania Jordan Morocco Nepal Iran Egypt
1
2
3
4
5
6
Level of Democracy
R²=0.27 Sources: World Bank (2002-2008), Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006)
Israel
Cyp
Seychelles Tuvalu Malaysia Fiji Namibia Burkina Faso Cuba Sri Lanka Mexico Kiribati Syria Colombia Djibouti Panama Armenia Ethiopia Vanuatu LibyaVietnam Bolivia Russia Ecuador Georgia Marshall Isl Turkmenistan Nigeria Paraguay Zimbabwe Angola Myanmar Congo, Democratic Republic Afghanistan Iraq Haiti
0
Saudi Arabia
-2
38
Control of Corruption
3
Low Corruption
7
8
9
10 High
Data runs by: Richard Svensson
Correlates of Democracy – Description of Variables1 Level of Democracy – Freedom House / Polity Scale ranges from 0-10 where 0 is least democratic and 10 most democratic. Average of Freedom House (fh_pr and fh_cl) is transformed to a scale 0-10 and Polity (p_polity2) is transformed to a scale 0-10. These variables are averaged into fh_polity2. The imputed version has imputed values for countries where data on Polity is missing by regressing Polity on the average Freedom House measure. Hadenius & Teorell (2005) show that this average index performs better both in terms of validity and reliability than its constituent parts.
GDP / Capita – Gleditsch Trade and GDP Data In order to fill in gaps in the Penn World Table’s mark 5.6 and 6.2 data (see below: Heston, Summers & Aten), Gleditsch has imputed missing data by using an alternative source of data (the CIA World Fact Book), and through extrapolation beyond available time-series. This is his estimate of GDP per Capita in US dollars at current year international prices. Economic Equality (Gini index) – World Development Indicators Gini measure of economic inequality, where greater values represent greater inequality. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. Economic Freedom – Heritage Foundation The Economic Freedom index uses 10 specific freedoms, some as composites of even further detailed and quantifiable components: Business freedom (hf_business) Trade freedom (hf_trade) Fiscal freedom (hf_fiscal) Freedom from government (hf_govt) Monetary freedom (hf_monetary) Investment freedom (hf_invest) Financial freedom (hf_financ) Property rights (hf_prights) Freedom from corruption (hf_corrupt) Labor freedom (hf_labor) Each of these freedoms is weighted equally and turned into an index ranging from 0 to 100, where 100 represents the maximum economic freedom. Although changes in methodology have been
1 Some of the variables have been reversed in the scatterplots in order to make the interpretation more intuitive
39
undertaken throughout the measurement period, continuous backtracking has been used to maximize comparability over time. GDP / Capita growth – World Development Indicators Annual percentage growth rate of GDP per capita based on constant local currency. Sources: World Bank and OECD. Population below $2 a Day (%) – World Development Indicators Percentage of the population living on less than $2.00 a day at 2005 international prices. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. Foreign Credit Rating – Standard & Poor’s Credit ratings are forward-looking opinions about credit risk. Standard & Poor’s credit ratings express the agency’s opinion about the ability and willingness of an issuer, such as a corporation or state or city government, to meet its financial obligations in full and on time. Credit ratings can also speak to the credit quality of an individual debt issue, such as a corporate note, a municipal bond or a mortgage-backed security, and the relative likelihood that the issue may default. Ratings are provided by organizations such as Standard & Poor’s, commonly called credit rating agencies, which specialize in evaluating credit risk. Each agency applies its own methodology in measuring creditworthiness and uses a specific rating scale to publish its ratings opinions. Typically, ratings are expressed as letter grades that range, for example, from ‘AAA’ to ‘D’ to communicate the agency’s opinion of relative level of credit risk. Human Development Index – UNDP Human Development Report The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite index that measures the average achievements in a country in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, as measured by life expectancy at birth;; knowledge, as measured by the adult literacy rate and the combined gross enrolment ratio for primary, secondary and tertiary schools;; and a decent standard of living, as measured by GDP per capita in purchasing power parity (PPP) US dollars. Government Revenue (% of GDP) – World Development Indicators Revenue is cash receipts from taxes, social contributions and other revenues. Grants are excluded here. Measured as a percentage of GDP. Source: International Monetary Fund. (World Bank and OECD for GDP estimates.) Tax Revenue (% of GDP) – World Development Indicators Tax revenue refers to compulsory transfers to the central government for public purposes. Certain compulsory transfers such as fines, penalties, and most social security contributions are excluded. Measured as a percentage of GDP. Source: International Monetary Fund. (World Bank and OECD for GDP estimates.)
40
Social Security Laws – Botero, Djankov, La Porta, López-de-Silanes & Shleifer Regulation of Labor Measures social security benefits as the average of the three variables: x Old Age, Disability and Death Benefit Index x Sickness and Health Benefits Index x Unemployment Benefits Index Average Schooling Years – Barro & Lee Average schooling years in the total population aged 25 and over. Life Expectancy – World Development Indicators Life expectancy at birth indicates the number of years a newborn infant would live if prevailing patterns of mortality at the time of its birth were to stay the same throughout its life. Sources: United Nations Population Division, national statistical offices, Eurostat, Secretariat of the Pacific Community, and U.S. Census Bureau. Healthy Life Years – WHO Statistical Information System Average number of years that a person can expect to live in "full health" by taking into account years lived in less than full health due to disease and/or injury. Infant Mortality Rate – World Development Indicators Infant mortality rate is the number of infants dying before reaching one year of age, per 1,000 live births in a given year. Source: Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (UNICEF, WHO, World Bank, UNPD, universities and research institutions). Maternal Mortality Rate – Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation University of Washington Number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live Births. Government Expenditure on Health (% of total health) – WHO Statistical Information System Government expenditure on health care services and goods as a percentage of total expenditure on health. Expenditures on health include final consumption, subsidies to producers, and transfers to households (chiefly reimbursements for medical and pharmaceutical bills). Besides domestic funds it also includes external resources (mainly as grants passing through the government or loans channeled through the national budget). Private Expenditure on Health (% of total health) – WHO Statistical Information System Private expenditure on health-care services and goods as a percentage of total expenditure on health. CO2 Emissions / Capita – Environmental Performance Index Emissions of greenhouse gases per capita, measured in tons of carbon dioxide equivalents.
41
Access to Improved Drinking Water – Environmental Performance Index The percentage of population with an access to an improved water source. Original source is WHO. Access to Adequate Sanitation – Environmental Performance Index The percentage of population with an access to an improved source of sanitation. Original source is WHO. Gender Equality – World Economic Forum All scores are reported on a scale of 0 to 1, with 1 representing maximum gender equality. The study measures the extent to which women have achieved full equality with men in five critical areas: - Economic participation - Economic opportunity - Political empowerment - Educational Attainment - Health and well-being Secondary Education Enrollment (female) – UNESCO Institute for Statistics All values given are gross enrollment rate (GER). GER is defined as the number of pupils enrolled at a given level of education, regardless of age, expressed as a percentage of the population in the theoretical age group for the same level of education. Gross enrollment rate can be over 100% due to the inclusion of over-aged and under-aged pupils/students because of early or late entrants, and grade repetition. In this case, a rigorous interpretation of GER needs additional information to assess the extent of repetition, late entrants, etc. Homicide Rate – UNODC Intentional homicide, rate per 100,000 population. Intentional homicide is defined as unlawful death purposefully inflicted on a person by another person. Number of Police Officers – UNODC Police officers per 100,000 population. Number of Prisoners – UNODC Sentenced incarcerated persons per 100,000 population Interpersonal Trust – World Values Survey “Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people? (1)
Most people can be trusted
(2)
Can’t be too careful”
42
Confidence in Parliament – World Values Survey “I am going to name a number of organizations. For each one, could you tell me how much confidence you have in them: is it a great deal of confidence, quite a lot of confidence, not very much confidence or none at all? (1) A great deal (2) Quite a lot (3) Not very much (4) None at all” Confidence in Government – World Values Survey “I am going to name a number of organizations. For each one, could you tell me how much confidence you have in them: is it a great deal of confidence, quite a lot of confidence, not very much confidence or none at all? (1) A great deal (2) Quite a lot (3) Not very much (4) None at all” Feeling of Happiness – World Values Survey “Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are? (1) Very happy (2) Quite happy (3) Not very happy (3) Not at all happy” Life Satisfaction – World Values Survey “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days? (1) Dissatisfied (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Satisfied” Government Effectiveness – World Bank Governance Indicators “Government Effectiveness” combines into a single grouping responses on the quality of public service provision, the quality of the bureaucracy, the competence of civil servants, the independence of the civil service from political pressures, and the credibility of the government’s commitment to policies. The main focus of this index is on “inputs” required for the government to be able to produce and implement good policies and deliver public goods.
43
Control of Corruption – World Bank Governance Indicators “Control of Corruption” measures perceptions of corruption, conventionally defined as the exercise of public power for private gain. The particular aspect of corruption measured by the various sources differs somewhat, ranging from the frequency of “additional payments to get things done”, to the effects of corruption on the business environment, to measuring “grand corruption” in the political arena or in the tendency of elite forms to engage in “state capture”.
44
