nations in transit 2013: overall democracy scores · nations in transit 2013: overall democracy...
Post on 14-Apr-2018
227 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Nations in Transit 2013: Overall Democracy Scores
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Slo
ven
ia
Est
on
ia
Lat
via
Cze
ch R
epu
bli
c
Po
lan
d
Lit
hu
ania
Slo
vak
ia
Hu
ngar
y
Bu
lgar
ia
Ro
man
ia
Cro
atia
Ser
bia
Mon
ten
egro
Mac
edo
nia
Alb
ania
Bo
snia
-Her
zeg
ov
ina
Geo
rgia
Mold
ova
Uk
rain
e
Ko
sovo
Arm
enia
Ky
rgy
zsta
n
Ru
ssia
Taj
ikis
tan
Kaz
akh
stan
Aze
rbai
jan
Bel
arus
Tu
rkm
enis
tan
Uzb
ekis
tan
NEW EU STATES THE BALKANS EURASIAN STATES
Strongest
Weakest
Consolidated Democracies
1.00-2.99
Consolidated Authoritarian
Regimes
6.00-7.00
Transitional
Governments
4.00-4.99
Semi-Consolidated
Democracies
3.00-3.99
Semi-
Consolidated
Authoritarian
Regimes
5.00-5.99
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
Democracy Score Changes, NIT 2013 vs. 2012
6
17
6 Status Quo
Declines
Improvements
1
7
2
NEW EU MEMBERS
Average Democracy Score: 2.47
3 4
THE BALKANS
Average Democracy Score: 4.13
2
6
4
EURASIAN STATES
Average Democracy Score: 6.00
Democracy Scores declined in 59 percent of NIT countries. Although new EU states have among the highest democracy scores of
the surveyed region, more of these countries (70 percent) declined in NIT 2013 than in any other subregion.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings reflect the
period January 1 through December 31, 2012, while the 2012 ratings reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2011.
Net Changes in Democracy Scores, NIT 2013 vs. 2005
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3M
old
ova
Geo
rgia
Cze
ch R
epu
bli
c
Cro
atia
Ser
bia
Ko
sovo
Lat
via
-1
-0.9
-0.8
-0.7
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
Mon
ten
egro
Mac
edo
nia
Bel
arus
Lit
hu
ania
Ro
man
ia
Po
lan
d
Arm
enia
Slo
ven
ia
Alb
ania
Bo
snia
Kaz
akh
stan
Ky
rgy
zsta
n
Uk
rain
e
Taj
ikis
tan
Uzb
ekis
tan
Slo
vak
ia
Ru
ssia
Aze
rbai
jan
Hu
ngar
y
DECLINES
Net
Ch
an
ges
in
Dem
ocr
acy
Sco
re,
NIT
20
13
vs.
20
05
NEW EU STATES
THE BALKANS
EURASIAN STATES
IMPROVEMENTS
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2012, while the 2005 ratings reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2004. Data from NIT
2005 were selected in order to compare current Democracy Scores with those during the 2004 round of EU enlargement.
Only countries engaged in EU integration have experienced improvements since NIT 2005. However, Hungary, which was
among the first Central European states to enter the EU, has declined more than any other country in that period.
Net
Ch
an
ges
in
Dem
ocr
acy
Sco
re,
NIT
20
13
vs.
20
05
Net Changes in Democracy Scores, NIT 2013 vs. 2005: Countries that
entered the EU during the 2004 and 2007 rounds of enlargement
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
Czech
Republic
Latvia
-1
-0.9
-0.8
-0.7
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0Lithuania
Romania
NIT 2008 Poland Slovenia
Bulgaria
NIT 2008 Slovakia Hungary
DECLINES IMPROVEMENTS
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The NIT ratings reflect
the period January 1 through December 31 of the year preceding the publication. Data from NIT 2005 and 2008 were selected in order to compare
current Democracy Scores with those during the 2004 and 2007 rounds of EU enlargement.
Of the countries that entered the EU in 2004, only the Czech Republic and Latvia have improved since their accession.
Estonia’s Democracy Score did not experience a net change between NIT 2005 and NIT 2013.
Net
Ch
an
ges
in
Dem
ocr
acy
Sco
re,
NIT
20
13
vs.
20
05
Net
Ch
an
ges
in
Dem
ocr
acy
Sco
re,
NIT
20
13
vs.
20
05
/20
08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Slovenia Estonia Latvia
Czech
Republic Poland Lithuania Slovakia Hungary Bulgaria RomaniaN
IT D
emo
cra
cy S
core
s
Consolidated
Democracies
1.00–2.99
Hungary is close to falling out of the Consolidated Democracies category
Semi-
Consolidated
Democracies
3.00-3.99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The NIT ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31 of the year preceding the publication.
Hungary’s Democracy Score has declined since NIT 2006
NIT
Dem
ocr
acy
Sco
res
Average Democracy Scores (DS) of EU Entrants and Candidates
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The NIT ratings reflect the
period January 1 through December 31 of the year preceding the publication.
The countries that entered the EU in the 2004 round of enlargement had a much higher average DS at the time than Croatia in NIT
2013. Croatia will accede to the EU on 1 July 2013. Candidate and potential candidate countries are performing even worse.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2004 Entrants
NIT DS 2005
2007 Entrants
NIT DS 2008
Acceding Country
NIT DS 2013
Candidates
NIT DS 2013
Potential Candidates
NIT DS 2013
2004 ENTRANTS: Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary,
Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia
2007 ENTRANTS: Bulgaria and Romania
ACCEDING COUNTRY: Croatia CANDIDATES: Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia
POTENTIAL CANDIDATES: Albania, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, and Kosovo
Strongest
Weakest
2013 Overview: New EU States
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Slovenia Estonia Latvia
Czech
Republic Poland Lithuania Slovakia Hungary Bulgaria Romania
Electoral Process Civil Society Independent Media
National Democratic Governance Local Democratic Governance Judicial Indepenence
Corruption
Strongest
Weakest
New EU states experienced the most declines in independent media (3) and corruption (2). Latvia was the only country in the group to
improve its corruption rating in NIT 2013.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings reflect the
period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
2013 Overview: The Balkans
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Croatia Serbia Montenegro Macedonia Albania
Bosnia &
Herzegovina Kosovo
Electoral Process Civil Society Independent MediaNational Democratic Governance Local Democratic Governance Judicial IndepenenceCorruption
Strongest
Weakest
The ratings of the Balkan countries mostly stagnated in NIT 2013, except on corruption, for which they declined in Albania, Bosnia,
and Kosovo.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings reflect the
period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
2013 Overview: Eurasian States
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Georgia Moldova Ukraine Armenia Kyrgyzstan Russia Tajikistan Kazakhstan Azerbaijan Belarus Turkmenistan Uzbekistan
Electoral Process Civil Society Independent Media
National Democratic Governance Local Democratic Governance Judicial Independence
Corruption
Strongest
Weakest
As expected, countries in this subregion mostly declined, with the exception of a few improvements in Georgia, Armenia, and
Kyrgyzstan. Kyrgyzstan was upgraded to a semi-consolidated authoritarian regime, joining Armenia and Kosovo in that category.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings reflect
the period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
2013 Overview: New EU States, the Balkans, and Eurasian States
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
New EU States The Balkans Eurasian States
Electoral Process Civil Society Independent MediaNational Democratic Governance Local Democratic Governance Judicial IndepenenceCorruption
Strongest
Weakest
New EU states perform better than the other subregions in every category. Their weakest categories are independent media, national
democratic governance, and corruption. The same categories, along with judicial independence, are also the weakest indicators in the
Balkans.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings reflect the
period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
Significant Ratings Changes, NIT 2013 vs. 2008: New EU Members
-1.25
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Slovakia Lithuania Poland Bulgaria Romania HungaryImprovement
Decline
INDEPENDENT MEDIA • NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE • CORRUPTION
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings reflect the
period January 1 through December 31, 2012, while the 2008 ratings reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2007.
Compared with five years ago, some new EU members experienced significant declines in independent media, national democratic
governance, and corruption. The exceptions were Poland and Lithuania, which improved in national democratic governance and
corruption, respectively.
Democracy Gap Across the Balkans, NIT 2013
Electoral
Process
Civil Society
Independent
Media
National
Democratic
Governance
Local
Democratic
Governance
Judicial
Framework and
Independence
Corruption Kosovo
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Albania
Macedonia
Montenegro
Serbia
Croatia
NIT 2013
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
Countries with the worst ratings take up the greatest area on the graph. For example, a country with the absolute worst ratings would
fill the entire graph, while a country with a perfect score would not be visible at all.
Democracy Gap Across Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia,
NIT 2013
Electoral Process
Civil Society
Independent Media
National
Democratic
Governance
Local Democratic
Governance
Judicial Framework
and Independence
Corruption
Russia
Ukraine
Albania
Croatia
Romania
Slovenia
NIT 2013
Countries with the worst ratings take up the greatest area on the graph. For example, a country with the absolute worst ratings
would fill the entire graph, while a country with a perfect score would not be visible at all.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
Democracy Gap Across Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia,
Regional Averages in NIT 2013
Electoral Process
Civil Society
Independent
Media
National
Democratic
Governance
Local Democratic
Governance
Judicial
Framework and
Independence
Corruption
Eurasian States
The Balkans
New EU States
NIT 2013
Countries with the worst ratings take up the greatest area on the graph. For example, a country with the absolute worst ratings
would fill the entire graph, while a country with a perfect score would not be visible at all.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
A bad year for NGOs: Seven countries declined on Civil Society
in NIT 2013
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2013 Civil Society RatingWeakest
Strongest Azerbaijan Hungary Kosovo Russia Belarus Tajikistan Kazakhstan
Governments across all subregions of the survey demonstrated less tolerance for criticism from the civil society sector.
Reverberations of the Arab Spring were still felt in Eurasia, where governments passed increasingly restrictive laws and cracked
down harshly on demonstrations. Civil society organizations in Central Europe struggled for financial sustainability.
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings reflect
the period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
Eurasian States with Declines in Civil Society, NIT 2011–2013
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
Russia Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Belarus
2011 2012 2013
NIT
Civ
il S
oci
ety
Ra
tin
gs
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The NIT ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31 of the year preceding the publication.
NIT Years
Nations in Transit 2013, Eurasia Findings: Overall Democracy Scores
DECLINES in 6 states
IMPROVEMENTS in 4 states
STATUS QUO in 2 states
Most declines in Civil Society (5).
Azerbaijan and Tajikistan experienced
the largest downgrades in the subregion.
NIT 2013 marks the third consecutive year
of decline in Civil Society for Azerbaijan,
Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan.
Improvements in Electoral Process and
Local Democratic Governance have
gradually upgraded Kyrgyzstan to a Semi-
Consolidation Authoritarian Regime,
alongside Armenia and Kosovo.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Georgia
Ukraine
Moldova
Armenia
Kyrgyzstan
Tajikistan
Russia
Kazakhstan
Azerbaijan
Belarus
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Overall Democracy Scores, NIT 2013
Strongest Weakest
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The 2013 ratings
reflect the period January 1 through December 31, 2012.
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Ukraine’s Democracy Score is rapidly
approaching its pre–Orange Revolution level
Note: The NIT ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The NIT
ratings reflect the period January 1 through December 31 of the year preceding the publication.
NIT
Dem
ocr
acy
Sco
res
NIT Years
Ukraine’s Democracy Score is 0.02 points away from its NIT 2004 rating.
top related