GS Paper II

News Excerpt:

The V-Dem Institute’s recent democracy index termed India as “one of the worst autocratisers”. Similar indices have downgraded India’s democratic standing in recent years — India is only ‘partly free’ (Freedom House), is home to a “flawed democracy” (The Economist Intelligence Unit) and is better classified as an “electoral autocracy.” 

Approaches and methodologies used by different indices:

• There are many approaches to measuring democracy, some using facts, some judgement and some a mix of both.
• The four broad types of data that these indices use are —
• Observational data (OD): Data on observable facts, such as voter turnout rates.
• ‘In-house’ coding: Researchers assess country-specific information using academic material, newspapers, etc.
• Expert surveys: Selected experts from a country provide a subjective evaluation.
• Representative surveys: A selected group of citizens offer judgments.
• The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has endorsed using observational, objective data over the judgement-based methodology for assessments to make them “more broadly acceptable.”
• Others, however, find fact-based metrics “insufficient” and expert intervention necessary to capture the on-ground realities of governance.

• Each index asks and responds to a different question evaluating the health of democracy.
  • While all agree that democracy is a political system in which citizens get to participate in free and fair elections (electoral democracy), indices like V-Dem’s, Economist Intelligence Unit and the Bertelsmann Transformation Index assess other dimensions as well:

• • • Is democracy ‘participatory’, and are citizen groups and civil society organisations functional?

• • • Are decisions made deliberately, in the best interest of all people, rather than through coercion or minority group interests?

• • • Is it egalitarian — are economic and social resources distributed equally?

• The approach also varies vastly. Some use only two indicators while others have more than 400.
• The weightage assigned and aggregation model followed, also fluctuate across projects.
• V-Dem’s researchers code a series of indicators for 12 areas across media, civil society, political parties, and civil liberties and each area is assigned five experts.

Limitations of indices:

• The main criticism of democracy indices is that they are subjective and lack precision. Evaluations are based on researchers' and coders' judgments rather than tangible characteristics.
• For example, V-Dem's "egalitarian" indicator assesses the equality of social groups in the political arena, which is a vague question compared to how many political parties exist in a country.
• However, an investigation found limited expert biases in some indices. Scholar Paul Staniland studied V-Dem's assessment of India since 1947 and agreed that there's no obvious anti-right-wing bias.
• Another concern is that some indices only survey non-independent and microstates, and smaller countries may be overlooked.
• Additionally, there is an ideological discrepancy in democracy indices due to the amorphous definition of democracy.
• For instance, Lesotho suffered a military coup in 2014 and is assigned a higher score than India.
• There is no perfect democracy index, just like there is no single definition of democracy.
• However, experts agree that democracy indices are crucial tools for analysing large-scale dynamics, comparing components across time periods and geographies, and benchmarking regimes' strengths and weaknesses.

India's scepticism as well as its concerns:

• The Indian Government has refuted all global assessments of Indian conditions, including democracy, press freedom, hunger, human development, and happiness.
• The negative perception of India's democracy and the assessments and commentary by think tanks and agencies could potentially harm India's sovereign ratings and its ranking on the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators.
• India's ranking in democracy assessments is often compared to countries such as Niger (which is ruled by a military junta) and the Ivory Coast.
• It is in the same category as Palestine, which has led to concerns about the accuracy of these indices.
• Critics of democracy assessments argue that the methodology is flawed, sample sizes are inadequate, and these indices favour cultural bias and subjective opinion over objective metrics.
• In 2021, the Foreign Minister called the makers of these indices "self-appointed custodians" who have their own motives.
• India now plans to release its own democracy index, which will help India counter recent downgrades in ratings and severe criticisms by international groups.

Conclusion:

The discourse surrounding democracy indices involves a nuanced understanding of their methodologies, limitations, and implications for countries like India. While criticisms exist, democracy indices remain crucial for assessing and benchmarking democratic governance on a global scale. However, India's fair elections and electoral participation suggest that India performs as well as any other democracy.