Grátis
40 pág.
Denunciar
Pré-visualização | Página 9 de 16
to have taken hold in Tunisia after mass protests led to the ousting of long-time dictator Ben Ali in 2011. Following the first democratic elections in 2014, a second and successful round of elections led to a peaceful transfer of power that seems to have stabilized the democratization process. In Armenia, pro-democracy activists can now similarly harvest the fruits of their peaceful protests in celebrating that a democrati- cally elected government has been in power for a full year in 2019. Ecuador is another notable case. Grassroots movements in favor of democracy played a decisive role in reversing the autocratiza- tion process initiated under former President Rafael Correa. During his tenure from 2007 to 2017, he changed the constitution in order to expand his powers and censor the media, as we reported in the 2017 Democracy At Dusk? report.34 Starting in earnest in 2012, indigenous groups, the environmental movement, unions, and student groups orchestrated mass protests, which eventually forced Correa to abandon his plans to stand for re-election in 2017. PAIS Alliance’s new candidate Lenín Moreno won the presidential contest and – much to the surprise of many observers – reversed many of the autocratic-leaning measures of his predecessor.35 However, Ecuador’s citizens rose again in 2019, now protesting against Moreno’s economic policies and the regime responded in part with a disproportionate use of violence. The outcome remains uncertain, illustrating that the route from pro-democracy mass protests to a stable democracy is often bumpy. The 2019 “Year of Protest” shows that movement-based successes do not come easily. Only sustained, organized, and peaceful activ- ism can eventually help to build democracy in countries now attempting to become free. We also know that economic griev- ances often trigger popular protests, in particular in fledgling democracies. Protesters want to see that the political system can address their needs on socio-economic fronts as well. In the longer run, if new democracies are not able to deliver, they might not prevail.36 23STATE OF THE WORLD 2020 Top 50% of countries Score Confidence interval Autocratizing countries Democratizing countries 2009 2019 FIGURE 18: COUNTRIES BY SCORE ON V-DEM’S LIBERAL DEMOCRACY INDEX (LDI), 2009 COMPARED TO 2019 Orange country names signify cases of significant and substantial autocratization. Green country names indicate cases of significant and substantial democrati- zation. The graph divides all countries’ LDI scores into ranks of top 10% to 50% and bottom 50% to 10%. Lines indicate the confidence intervals around the point estimates. Countries with overlapping confidence intervals are statistically indistinguishable.37 37 The confidence intervals we report here are actually 68% highest posterior density intervals, a Bayesian corollary of frequentist confidence intervals. Uruguay South Korea France Netherlands Luxembourg Australia United Kingdom Ireland Finland Spain New Zealand Costa Rica Portugal Belgium Norway Switzerland Sweden Estonia Denmark To p 10 % Score and Confidence Intervals United States of America Cyprus Latvia Slovenia Mauritius Slovakia Austria Cape Verde Barbados Lithuania Japan Greece Chile Iceland Italy Canada Germany To p 10 −2 0% Suriname Botswana Malta Senegal Namibia Sao Tome and Principe Israel South Africa Panama Vanuatu Ghana Argentina Trinidad and Tobago Armenia Tunisia Peru Jamaica Taiwan Czech Republic To p 20 −3 0% Nepal Lesotho Sri Lanka Seychelles Mexico Bulgaria Bhutan Indonesia Poland Ecuador Colombia Georgia Brazil Solomon Islands Timor−Leste Mongolia Croatia To p 30 −4 0% India Papua New Guinea Ivory Coast Sierra Leone Guatemala Hungary Kosovo Guyana Malawi Liberia Paraguay Albania North Macedonia Romania El Salvador Moldova The Gambia Benin 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Liberal Democracy Index To p 40 −5 0% 2009 2019 Autocratizing Democratizing 24 DEMOCRACY REPORT 2020 Score Confidence interval Autocratizing countries Democratizing countries 2009 2019 Ukraine Kuwait Bolivia Mali Fiji Madagascar Kyrgyzstan Dominican Republic Maldives Malaysia Kenya Nigeria Tanzania Niger Singapore Bosnia and Herzegovina Montenegro Bo tto m 4 0− 50 % Score and Confidence Intervals Afghanistan Central African Republic Uganda Angola Haiti Iraq Myanmar Serbia Jordan Hong Kong Morocco Somaliland Mozambique Burkina Faso Zambia Philippines Lebanon Guinea−Bissau Bo tto m 3 0− 40 % Democratic Republic of Congo Oman Iran Cameroon Thailand Rwanda Libya Mauritania Guinea Zimbabwe Ethiopia Togo Zanzibar Comoros Honduras Gabon Palestine/West Bank Pakistan Bo tto m 2 0− 30 % Uzbekistan Cambodia Cuba United Arab Emirates Laos Russia Republic of the Congo Bangladesh Turkey Somalia Chad Belarus Kazakhstan Algeria Vietnam Eswatini Egypt Djibouti Bo tto m 1 0− 20 % Eritrea North Korea Saudi Arabia Yemen Syria China Bahrain Turkmenistan Equatorial Guinea Nicaragua Burundi Tajikistan Azerbaijan Palestine/Gaza Venezuela Qatar Sudan 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Liberal Democracy Index Bo tto m 1 0% 2009 2019 Autocratizing Democratizing Bottom 50% of countries 25STATE OF THE WORLD 2020 The countries are sorted by regime type in 2019, and after that in alphabetical order. They are classified based on the Regimes of the World measure. We incorporate V-Dem’s confidence estimates in order to account for the uncertainty and potential measurement error due to the nature of the data but also to underline that some countries are placed in the grey zone between regime types. This builds on the regime-classification by Lührmann et al. (2018). While using V-Dem’s data, this measure is not officially endorsed by the Steering Committee of V-Dem (only the main V-Dem democracy indices have such an endorsement). TABLE 3: REGIMES OF THE WORLD 2009–2019 COUNTRY 2019 CHANGE FROM 2009 Australia LD Austria LD Belgium LD Denmark LD Finland LD Germany LD Ireland LD Japan LD Luxembourg LD Netherlands LD New Zealand LD South Korea LD Spain LD Sweden LD Switzerland LD Taiwan LD USA LD Uruguay LD Barbados LD – Bhutan LD - Botswana LD – Canada LD – Chile LD – Costa Rica LD – Cyprus LD – Estonia LD – France LD – Ghana LD – Israel LD – Italy LD – Latvia LD – Norway LD – Portugal LD – Slovenia LD – Trinidad and Tobago LD – Tunisia LD – United Kingdom LD – Cape Verde ED + Czech Republic ED + Gambia ED + Greece ED + Iceland ED + Jamaica ED + Lithuania ED + Mauritius ED + COUNTRY 2019 CHANGE FROM 2009 Namibia ED + São Tomé & Príncipe ED + Senegal ED + Slovakia ED + Vanuatu ED + Argentina ED Brazil ED Bulgaria ED Colombia ED Croatia ED Dominican Republic ED Ecuador ED El Salvador ED Georgia ED Guatemala ED Guyana ED Indonesia ED Ivory Coast ED Kosovo ED Liberia ED Malta ED Mexico ED Moldova ED Mongolia ED Nepal ED North Macedonia ED Panama ED Paraguay ED Peru ED Poland ED Romania ED Sierra Leone ED Solomon Islands ED South Africa ED Sri Lanka ED Suriname ED Timor-Leste ED BiH ED – Guinea-Bissau ED – India ED – Lesotho ED – Seychelles ED – Albania EA + Armenia EA + Benin EA + COUNTRY 2019 CHANGE FROM 2009 Bolivia EA + Fiji EA + Hungary EA + Lebanon EA + Madagascar EA + Malawi EA + Malaysia EA + Maldives EA + Mali EA + Montenegro EA + Nigeria EA + Papua New Guinea EA + Philippines EA + Ukraine EA + Afghanistan EA Algeria EA Angola EA Azerbaijan EA Bangladesh EA Belarus EA Burkina Faso EA Burundi EA CAR EA Cambodia EA Cameroon EA Chad EA Comoros EA Congo EA DRC EA Djibouti EA Egypt EA Equatorial Guinea EA Ethiopia EA Gabon EA Guinea EA Haiti EA Honduras EA Iran EA Iraq EA Kazakhstan EA Kenya EA Kyrgyzstan EA Mauritania EA Mozambique EA Myanmar EA COUNTRY 2019 CHANGE FROM 2009 Nicaragua EA Niger EA Pakistan EA Palestine/West Bank EA Russia EA Rwanda EA Serbia EA Singapore EA
