Measuring Democracy

There is no simple answer to the question of “what is democracy”, evident by the multitude of research on the very topic of coming up with a proper definition. In scholarly work, it is crucial to have a definition that fits, as your research and theories are at risk if you do not have the fundamental concept (democracy) down.

Defining democracy is so complicated because there are plethora of different types and approaches to democracy. Not only that, but some governments try to label themselves as democratic, or they may appear to be (with institutions such as “parliaments”),  but really they are far from democratic countries. Grandma, think the new “democracy” in Myanmar, or Russia: do you feel like those countries really operate under democratic principles? The issue of defining democracy is further complicated by problems of complexity within a definition (minimalist vs. complex like Dahl).

In simple conversation, democracy is best defined by freedom, whether it be in elections, citizen’s right to vote, or civil liberties. I tend to align with Dahl’s criteria for democracy, which are:

1. Freedom to form/ join organizations
2. Freedom of expression
3. Right to vote
4. Right to run for office
5. Right to campaign
6. Access to multiple sources of information
7. Free and fair elections
8. Elections determine government

To me, free and open elections with a underlying society with the universal right to vote, and the elections actually determining the government are the key components of what democracy is. Although Dahl doesn’t flat out say it, I also agree with Schmitter and Karl (and I think it is beneath the surface is Dahl’s criteria): in democracies, we are able to hold our leaders accountable for their actions.