Post on 28-Dec-2015
International IDEA’s State of Democracy Assessment
Methodology (SoD)
Introduction
Background & Objectives Attributes The Framework & Questions The Planning Process Assessments Lessons
Background
Developed in 2000
Based on the UK Democratic Audit methodology designed for the UK by Professors David Beetham & Stuart Weir
Why a SoD?
A qualitative assessment- complements quantitative assessments & analysis;
For motivating citizen participation in the evaluation of their democracy;
Focus on in-country debates, dialogues & agenda setting for democratic reform; rather than cross-country comparison;
Locally/Nationally led & owned Vs externally led/owned
Principles & Attributes
Clear demoratic principles: Popular control & Political Equality
Flexibility: Whole, in part, targeted & specific, context sensitive
Universal in application: Developed, developing countries, new & established democracies
Range of Use: agenda setting; academic purpose; awareness raising; evidence-based advocacy;
Clear mediating values:Participation, Authorisation, representation, accountability, transparency, responsiveness, Solidarity
Comprehensive: Links principles & mediating values with institutions & processes; and formal arrangements with practice.
The Questions
Four (4) pillars; 15 overarching questions; 75 specific questions
Questions are in comparative mode-- because democracies differ in degrees, they have weaknesses & strengths
Planning Process Clearly define purpose of assessment;
Define priorities for assessment-- (whole, in part, targeted, additional context specific issues?);
Define comparators (National? Regional? Int.?);
Planning Process
Determine data sources to be used (new, existing?);
Decide on consultative arrangements/ assessment; legitimation: Professional + Political;
Selection of assessors + division of labour (multi- disciplinary, & multi-stakeholder team recommended);
Planning Process
Modes of publication of findings (language (s), medium, what products?
Promotional strategy; Integration into reform process; Project time-frame (one of, rolling,
institutionalised?) Resources: what is needed & what is available
will determine breadth + depth of assessment
Assessments
25 assessments since 2000 Two assessments Government led
(Mongolia, The Netherlands) One Government supported: Latvia The rest conducted by Independent
institutions
Lessons
Capacity building for teams (Mongolia) Various motivations for assessments Various uses Policy reform/impact (Philippines,
Mongolia)