Jump to content

Democracy in Asia

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Map of V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index for 2024 in Asia

Democracy in Asia can be comparatively assessed[1] according to various definitions of democracy.[2] According to the V-Dem Democracy indices, the Asian countries with the highest democracy scores in year 2023 were Taiwan, Japan, Cyprus, Israel, and South Korea, meanwhile the Asian countries with lowest democracy scores in 2023 are Saudi Arabia, China and Afghanistan.[3] Democratic backsliding can be observed in parts of Asia.[4] The V-Dem Democracy Report identified for the year 2023 East Timor as a case of stand-alone democratization and Thailand and Maldives as cases of U-Turn democratization.[5]

By country

[edit]

Measures of democracy

[edit]

The table below shows Asian countries scored on V-Dem Democracy indices for year 2024.[6][7][8]

V-Dem Democracy Indices
Country Democracy Indices Democracy Component Indices
Electoral Liberal Liberal Egalitarian Participatory Deliberative
 Japan 0.82 0.734 0.902 0.934 0.562 0.908
 Taiwan 0.8 0.7 0.878 0.874 0.748 0.844
 Cyprus 0.774 0.651 0.839 0.902 0.566 0.831
 East Timor 0.733 0.549 0.72 0.569 0.552 0.715
 South Korea 0.729 0.631 0.872 0.856 0.61 0.809
 Israel 0.715 0.617 0.869 0.808 0.601 0.773
 Nepal 0.669 0.522 0.76 0.585 0.583 0.611
 Sri Lanka 0.664 0.486 0.699 0.671 0.594 0.617
 Armenia 0.623 0.414 0.61 0.802 0.411 0.688
 Maldives 0.564 0.423 0.714 0.584 0.48 0.705
 Bhutan 0.561 0.454 0.783 0.826 0.541 0.899
 Malaysia 0.517 0.362 0.643 0.709 0.538 0.673
 Mongolia 0.496 0.389 0.736 0.653 0.402 0.746
 Indonesia 0.483 0.326 0.606 0.538 0.592 0.811
 Georgia 0.48 0.328 0.615 0.726 0.507 0.751
 Papua New Guinea 0.461 0.384 0.784 0.461 0.514 0.507
 Philippines 0.435 0.308 0.633 0.314 0.571 0.526
 Singapore 0.414 0.343 0.752 0.805 0.132 0.742
 India 0.398 0.291 0.635 0.425 0.521 0.629
 Thailand 0.389 0.289 0.646 0.483 0.356 0.371
 Iraq 0.351 0.228 0.524 0.459 0.438 0.594
 Lebanon 0.348 0.207 0.463 0.379 0.421 0.557
 Kyrgyzstan 0.333 0.183 0.411 0.619 0.397 0.373
 Pakistan 0.313 0.199 0.48 0.223 0.499 0.529
 Kuwait 0.292 0.266 0.716 0.613 0.148 0.433
 Turkey 0.288 0.117 0.255 0.539 0.422 0.182
 Jordan 0.273 0.274 0.772 0.577 0.302 0.876
 Kazakhstan 0.272 0.134 0.326 0.539 0.291 0.5
 Uzbekistan 0.215 0.078 0.19 0.435 0.196 0.422
 Palestine (West Bank) 0.214 0.117 0.323 0.541 0.469 0.177
 Bangladesh 0.201 0.068 0.2 0.323 0.243 0.293
 Cambodia 0.186 0.056 0.133 0.206 0.207 0.183
 Azerbaijan 0.175 0.054 0.133 0.34 0.102 0.093
 Tajikistan 0.174 0.05 0.12 0.197 0.144 0.136
 Vietnam 0.174 0.124 0.382 0.614 0.499 0.659
 Oman 0.174 0.14 0.443 0.571 0.388 0.189
 Russia 0.172 0.056 0.143 0.371 0.376 0.109
 Hong Kong 0.169 0.133 0.421 0.736 0.142 0.15
 Iran 0.167 0.092 0.275 0.473 0.092 0.324
 Turkmenistan 0.149 0.033 0.076 0.289 0.075 0.039
 Syria 0.145 0.054 0.155 0.23 0.194 0.085
 Laos 0.134 0.102 0.339 0.428 0.386 0.164
 Yemen 0.127 0.047 0.142 0.087 0.166 0.132
 Bahrain 0.124 0.052 0.158 0.385 0.115 0.158
 United Arab Emirates 0.103 0.078 0.27 0.45 0.086 0.298
 Palestine (Gaza) 0.095 0.053 0.18 0.405 0.212 0.113
 Qatar 0.087 0.08 0.284 0.395 0.105 0.387
 North Korea 0.083 0.014 0.033 0.31 0.153 0.016
 Myanmar 0.083 0.016 0.041 0.21 0.34 0.195
 Afghanistan 0.081 0.016 0.044 0.077 0.027 0.073
 China 0.073 0.036 0.125 0.302 0.1 0.227
 Saudi Arabia 0.015 0.047 0.187 0.449 0.081 0.258

Human Rights in Southeast Asian Democracies

[edit]

Background:

Human rights scores provided by the Human Rights Measurement Initiative in the Southeast Asian region are compared to Democracy Index scores provided by V-Dem as the basis for the analysis. In this context, human rights are defined as the ability of a nation to maximize its capacity to provide access to basic social needs for its people.

Use Cases:

It is useful to analyze human rights scores in Southeast Asian democracies. The region is known for having some of the highest levels of human rights violations in the world and for having a variety of autocratic and democratic nations within a small demographic. Spotting trends of high levels of human rights abuse in democratic nations may signal democratic backsliding.

Case Studies:

The following three countries have the highest democracy index scores in Southeast Asia. These scores will be compared to human rights scores based on citizens’ rights to education, work, food, health, and housing. A score below 75% out of 100% is considered very bad, a score between 95% and 100% is considered good.

Timor-Leste (SEA democracy rank- 1):

After Indonesia granted independence to Timor-Leste following two decades of autocratic rule and a reported 100,000 deaths, the nation held its first democratic election on August 30, 2001. The country experienced democratic instability in the preceding years. However, its recent elections, characterized by peaceful transitions of power, have led the nation to achieve some of the highest democracy scores in the region. However, the nation remains economically challenged, and citizens’ access to all five categories of education, work, food, health, and housing all fall in the HRMI’s “very bad” category, with the mean score being 58% out of 100%.


Malaysia (SEA democracy rank- 2):

Malaysia is a federal constitutional monarchy and the only federal system in the Southeast Asian region. It is ranked second in its respective region for democracy, and despite recent political turmoil, elections are usually followed by peaceful transitions of power. Malaysia has made significant strides to reduce poverty in the country. It received an aggregate score of 78% by the HRMI. While the aggregate ranking falls in the “bad” category, individual scores for work (99%) and housing (90%) fall into the “good” and “fair” categories, respectively.

The Philippines (SEA democracy rank- 3):

The Republic of the Philippines was the first democratic republic in the region after achieving independence from the United States in 1946. The country’s government is modeled after that in the United States, and has achieved peaceful transitions of power up until Ferdinand Marcos’ rule beginning in 1965. The nation has had lasting economic effects from the Marcos era, although power has transitioned fairly peacefully since. In recent years, the Philippines has been cited as experiencing democratic backsliding by some scholars. The nation scores an aggregate 72% from the HRMI, landing it in the “very bad” category. Categories for health (77%), housing (80%), and work (82%) all fall within the “bad” category.


See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Geissel, Brigitte; Kneuer, Marianne; Lauth, Hans-Joachim (2016). "Measuring the quality of democracy: Introduction". International Political Science Review. 37 (5). Sage Publications: 571–579. doi:10.1177/0192512116669141. ISSN 0192-5121. JSTOR 26556872. S2CID 151808737. Retrieved 2023-04-03.
  2. ^ Greenwood, Shannon (2022-12-06). "Appendix A: Classifying democracies". Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  3. ^ V-Dem Institute (2023). "The V-Dem Dataset". Retrieved 14 October 2023.
  4. ^ Croissant, Aurel; Haynes, Jeffrey (2021). "Democratic regression in Asia: Introduction". Democratization. 28: 1–21. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1851203.
  5. ^ Nord, Marina; Lundstedt, Martin; Altman, David; Angiolillo, Fabio; et al. (2024). Lindberg, Staffan I. (ed.). Democracy Report 2024: Democracy Winning and Losing at the Ballot (PDF) (Report). University of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute.
  6. ^ "Democracy Report 2025, 25 Years of Autocratization – Democracy Trumped?" (PDF). Retrieved 14 March 2025.
  7. ^ "The V-Dem Dataset – V-Dem". V-Dem. V-Dem Institute. 2025. Retrieved 14 March 2025.
  8. ^ Coppedge, Michael; Gerring, John; Glynn, Adam; Knutsen, Carl Henrik; Lindberg, Staffan I.; et al. (January 2020). Varieties of Democracy: Measuring Two Centuries of Political Change. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108347860. ISBN 9781108347860.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Democracy_in_Asia&oldid=1292261212"