Note: This is a “dynamic” html document. You can hover on the charts and plots to get more information, zoom in and out of specific sections of the charts, and so on.


Introduction

This analysis is based on the new Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) data release on March 2021 (V-Dem version 11). See here for more information.


V-Dem: High Level Democracy Indices

V-Dem compiles five macro-level indices that describe features of democracy at the highest (most abstract) level. These five indices are:

  1. Electoral Democracy
  2. Liberal Democracy
  3. Participatory Democracy
  4. Deliberative Democracy
  5. Egalitarian Democracy


Index 1: Electoral Democracy

Question: To what extent is the ideal of electoral democracy in its fullest sense achieved?

Clarification: The electoral principle of democracy seeks to embody the core value of making rulers responsive to citizens, achieved through electoral competition for the electorate’s approval under circumstances when suffrage is extensive; political and civil society organizations can operate freely; elections are clean and not marred by fraud or systematic irregularities; and elections affect the composition of the chief executive of the country. In between elections, there is freedom of expression and an independent media capable of presenting alternative views on matters of political relevance.

Scale: 0 to 1.


Summary statistics:

Nepal: Electoral Democracy Index (1950 - 2020)
Min. 0.032
1st Qu. 0.096
Median 0.143
Mean 0.247
3rd Qu. 0.397
Max. 0.653


Histogram:


Temporal Distribution:


Animated time series showing change in Electoral Democracy over time:

Sub-Indices of Electoral Democracy:

The Electoral Democracy Index in V-Dem is compiled with information from five sub-indices:

  1. Freedom of association. To what extent are parties, including opposition parties, allowed to form and to participate in elections, and to what extent are civil society organizations able to form and to operate freely?
    Scale: 0 - 1 (Interval variable).

  2. Clean elections. To what extent are elections free and fair?
    Scale: 0 - 1 (Interval variable).

  3. Freedom of expression. To what extent does government respect press and media freedom, the freedom of ordinary people to discuss political matters at home and in the public sphere, as well as the freedom of academic and cultural expression?
    Scale: 0 - 1 (Interval variable).

  4. Elected officials. Is the chief executive and legislature appointed through popular elections?
    Scale: 0 - 1 (Interval variable).

  5. Suffrage. What share of adult citizens as defined by statute has the legal right to vote in national elections?
    Scale: 0 - 1 (Interval variable, represents percentage of adult citizens).


Summary statistics for five sub-indices of Electoral Democracy:

Freedom of Association Clean Elections Freedom of Expression Elected Officials Suffrage
Min. 0.058 0 0.107 0 0
1st Qu. 0.062 0 0.197 0 1
Median 0.397 0.047 0.275 0 1
Mean 0.417 0.134 0.481 0.301 0.972
3rd Qu. 0.805 0.214 0.831 0.800 1
Max. 0.859 0.647 0.902 1 1


Histogram of five sub-indices of Electoral Democracy:


Note: For suffrage, only the first two years (1950 and 1951) had a score of “0”, whereas all other years had a score of “1”.


Temporal distribution of five sub-indices of Electoral Democracy:


Animated time series showing change in Electoral Democracy sub-indices over time:


Index 2: Liberal Democracy

Question: To what extent is the ideal of liberal democracy achieved?

Clarification: The liberal principle of democracy emphasizes the importance of protecting individual and minority rights against the tyranny of the state and the tyranny of the majority. The liberal model takes a “negative” view of political power insofar as it judges the quality of democracy by the limits placed on government. This is achieved by constitutionally protected civil liberties, strong rule of law, an independent judiciary, and effective checks and balances that, together, limit the exercise of executive power. To make this a measure of liberal democracy, the index also takes the level of electoral democracy into account.

Scale: 0 - 1.

Summary statistics:

Nepal: Liberal Democracy Index (1950 - 2020)
Min. 0.024
1st Qu. 0.082
Median 0.101
Mean 0.198
3rd Qu. 0.316
Max. 0.544


Histogram:


Temporal Distribution:


Animated time series showing change in Liberal Democracy over time:


Sub-Indices of Liberal Democracy:

The Liberal Democracy Index in V-Dem is compiled with information from two sources: The Liberal Component Index, and Electoral Democracy Index.

  1. Liberal Component Index
    This index is formed by averaging the following three indices:

  • Equality before the law and individual liberties. To what extent are laws transparent and rigorously enforced and public administration impartial, and to what extent do citizens enjoy access to justice, secure property rights, freedom from forced labor, freedom of movement, physical integrity rights, and freedom of religion?
    Scale: Interval (0-1).

  • Judicial constraints on the executive. To what extent does the executive respect the constitution and comply with court rulings, and to what extent is the judiciary able to act in an independent fashion?
    Scale: Interval (0-1).

  • Legislative constraints on the executive. To what extent are the legislature and government agencies e.g., comptroller general, general prosecutor, or ombudsman capable of questioning, investigating, and exercising oversight over the executive?
    Scale: Interval (0-1).

  1. Electoral Democracy Index
    This is previously calculated.


Summary statistics for sub-indices of Liberal Democracy:

Rule of Law Judicial Constraints Legislative Constraints Liberal Component Electoral Democracy
Min. 0.028 0.242 0.248 0.091 0.032
1st Qu. 0.207 0.375 0.265 0.290 0.096
Median 0.243 0.476 0.597 0.347 0.143
Mean 0.416 0.564 0.574 0.469 0.247
3rd Qu. 0.623 0.794 0.776 0.707 0.397
Max. 0.831 0.824 0.916 0.835 0.653


Histogram of sub-indices of Liberal Democracy:


Temporal distribution of sub-indices of Liberal Democracy:


Animated time series showing change in Liberal Democracy sub-indices over time:


Index 3: Participatory Democracy


Question: To what extent is the ideal of participatory democracy achieved?

Clarification: The participatory principle of democracy emphasizes active participation by citizens in all political processes, electoral and non-electoral. It is motivated by uneasiness about a bedrock practice of electoral democracy: delegating authority to representatives. Thus, direct rule by citizens is preferred, wherever practicable. This model of democracy thus takes suffrage for granted, emphasizing engagement in civil society organizations, direct democracy, and sub-national elected bodies. To make it a measure of participatory democracy, the index also takes the level of electoral democracy into account.

Scale: 0 - 1.


Summary statistics:

Nepal: Participatory Democracy Index (1950 - 2020)
Min. 0.028
1st Qu. 0.061
Median 0.071
Mean 0.141
3rd Qu. 0.233
Max. 0.436


Histogram:


Temporal distribution:


Animated time series showing change in Participatory Democracy over time:


Sub-Indices of Participatory Democracy:

The Participatory Democracy Index in V-Dem is compiled with information from two sources: The Participatory Component Index, and Electoral Democracy Index.

  1. Participatory Component Index
    This index is formed by averaging the following three indices:

  • Civil society participation. Are major CSOs routinely consulted by policymakers; how large is the involvement of people in CSOs; are women prevented from participating; and is legislative candidate nomination within party organization highly decentralized or made through party primaries?
    Scale: Interval (0-1).

  • Elected local government power or elected regional government power — whichever has higher score. In Nepal’s case, it is the elected local government power - Are there elected local governments, and — if so — to what extent can they operate without interference from unelected bodies at the local level?
    Scale: Interval (0-1).

  • Direct popular vote. An institutionalized process by which citizens of a region or country register their choice or opinion on specific issues through a ballot. It is intended to embrace initiatives, referendums, and plebiscites, as those terms are usually understood. It captures some aspects of the more general concept of direct democracy at the national level. The term does not encompass recall elections, deliberative assemblies, or settings in which the vote is not secret or the purview is restricted. Likewise, it does not apply to elections for representatives.
    Scale: Interval (0-1).

  1. Electoral Democracy Index
    This is previously calculated.


Summary statistics for sub-indices of Participatory Democracy:

Civil Society Participation Local Government Power Direct Popular Vote Participatory Component Electoral Democracy
Min. 0.145 0.159 0 0.107 0.032
1st Qu. 0.197 0.278 0 0.209 0.096
Median 0.276 0.415 0 0.233 0.143
Mean 0.484 0.435 0.005 0.311 0.247
3rd Qu. 0.825 0.428 0 0.422 0.397
Max. 0.892 0.993 0.100 0.630 0.653


Histogram of sub-indices of Participatory Democracy:


Temporal distribution of sub-indices of Participatory Democracy:


Animated time series showing change in Participatory Democracy sub-indices over time:


Index 4: Deliberative Democracy


Question: To what extent is the ideal of deliberative democracy achieved?

Clarification: The deliberative principle of democracy focuses on the process by which decisions are reached in a polity. A deliberative process is one in which public reasoning focused on the common good motivates political decisions—as contrasted with emotional appeals, solidary attachments, parochial interests, or coercion. According to this principle, democracy requires more than an aggregation of existing preferences. There should also be respectful dialogue at all levels—from preference formation to final decision—among informed and competent participants who are open to persuasion. To make it a measure of not only the deliberative principle but also of democracy, the index also takes the level of electoral democracy into account.

Scale: 0 - 1.


Summary statistics:

Nepal: Deliberative Democracy Index (1950 - 2020)
Min. 0.007
1st Qu. 0.068
Median 0.162
Mean 0.197
3rd Qu. 0.345
Max. 0.469


Histogram:


Temporal distribution:


Animated time series showing change in Deliberative Democracy over time:


Sub-Indices of Deliberative Democracy:

The Deliberative Democracy Index in V-Dem is compiled with information from two sources: The Deliberative Component Index, and Electoral Democracy Index.

  1. Deliberative Component Index

The index is formed by point estimates drawn from a Bayesian factor analysis model including the following indicators: reasoned justification, common good justification, respect for counterarguments, range of consultation, and engaged society.
Scale: Interval (0-1).

  1. Electoral Democracy Index
    This is previously calculated.


Summary statistics for sub-indices of Deliberative Democracy:

Reasoned Justification Common Good Justification Respect for Counterarguments Range of Consultation Engaged Society Deliberative Component (0-1) Electoral Component (0-1)
Min. -2.279 -2.606 -2.769 -1.656 -2.420 0.023 0.032
1st Qu. -0.133 -1.123 -1.557 -0.679 -0.349 0.241 0.096
Median 0.825 -0.718 -0.521 0.456 0.702 0.556 0.143
Mean 0.615 -0.749 -0.485 0.224 0.568 0.480 0.247
3rd Qu. 1.079 -0.440 0.482 1.093 1.192 0.651 0.397
Max. 1.573 0.061 0.824 2.004 2.143 0.840 0.653


Histogram of sub-indices of Deliberative Democracy:


Minor sub-indices:


Major sub-indices:


Temporal distribution of sub-indices of Deliberative Democracy:

Minor Sub-Indices:


Major Sub-Indices:


Animated time series showing change in Deliberative Democracy sub-indices over time:


Index 5: Egalitarian Democracy

Question: To what extent is the ideal of egalitarian democracy achieved?

Clarification: The egalitarian principle of democracy holds that material and immaterial inequalities inhibit the exercise of formal rights and liberties, and diminish the ability of citizens from all social groups to participate. Egalitarian democracy is achieved when:

  1. Rights and freedoms of individuals are protected equally across all social groups.
  2. Resources are distributed equally across all social groups.
  3. Groups and individuals enjoy equal access to power.

To make it a measure of egalitarian democracy, the index also takes the level of electoral democracy into account.

Scale: Interval (0 - 1).


Summary statistics:

Nepal: Egalitarian Democracy Index (1950 - 2020)
Min. 0.026
1st Qu. 0.070
Median 0.076
Mean 0.172
3rd Qu. 0.284
Max. 0.447


Histogram:


Temporal Distribution:


Animated time series showing change in Egalitarian Democracy over time:


Sub-Indices of Egalitarian Democracy:

The Egalitarian Democracy Index in V-Dem is compiled with information from two components: the egalitarian component and the electoral democracy component.

  1. Egalitarian component. This index is formed by averaging the following indices:

  • Equal protection index. How equal is the protection of rights and freedoms across social groups by the state? The index is formed by taking the point estimates from a Bayesian factor analysis model of the indicators for social class equality in respect for civil liberties; social group equality in respect for civil liberties; and percent of population with weaker civil liberties (reversed scale).
    Scale: Interval (0 - 1).

  • Equal access index. How equal is access to power? The index is formed by taking the point estimates from a Bayesian factor analysis model of the indicators power distributed by socioeconomic position; power distributed by social group; and power distributed by gender.
    Scale: Interval (0 - 1).

  • Equal distribution of resources index. How equal is the distribution of resources? The index is formed by taking the point estimates from a Bayesian factor analysis model of the indicators for particularistic or public goods; means tested vs. universalistic welfare policies; educational equality; and health equality.
    Scale: Interval (0 - 1).

  1. Electoral Democracy Component. This is previously calculated.


Summary statistics for five sub-indices of Egalitarian Democracy:

Equal Protection Index Equal Access Index Equal Distribution of Resources Index Egalitarian Component Electoral Component
Min. 0.125 0.087 0.038 0.098 0.032
1st Qu. 0.238 0.349 0.092 0.243 0.096
Median 0.243 0.349 0.118 0.254 0.143
Mean 0.467 0.506 0.201 0.396 0.247
3rd Qu. 0.747 0.731 0.339 0.608 0.397
Max. 0.868 0.861 0.374 0.688 0.653


Histogram of five sub-indices of Electoral Democracy:


Temporal distribution of five sub-indices of Egalitarian Democracy:


Animated time series showing change in Egalitarian Democracy sub-indices over time:



Evolution of OVERALL Democracy in Nepal


Summary statistics of the five major democracy indices in Nepal:

Electoral Democracy Liberal Democracy Participatory Democracy Deliberative Democracy Egalitarian Democracy
Min. 0.032 0.024 0.028 0.007 0.026
1st Qu. 0.096 0.082 0.061 0.068 0.070
Median 0.143 0.101 0.071 0.162 0.076
Mean 0.247 0.198 0.141 0.197 0.172
3rd Qu. 0.397 0.316 0.233 0.345 0.284
Max. 0.653 0.544 0.436 0.469 0.447


Histograms of the five major democracy indices in Nepal:


Plot of five major democracy indices over time:


Animated plot of five major democracy indices over time:


Conclusion:

The trends here that illustrate democratization and democratic backsliding in Nepal over the past seven decades are not especially surprising to anyone familiar with the history of Nepal. We can see an initial increase in the democracy indices during the first wave of democracy after the end of the Rana rule, followed by a decrease and stability over the Panchayat period, a sudden increase after the second wave of democratization in 1990, a decrease in the early/mid 2000’s, and an increase after the 2008 elections. What’s informative about this analysis is it quantifies the various aspects of democracy, and shows trends over time for each of the five major indices, as well as the sub-indices that make the five major indices. We can see that none of the indices have scored especially high (the highest score being 0.65 for Electoral Democracy in 2016), suggesting major rooms for improvement across all domains of democracy.

Moreover, the score on electoral democracy has been consistently higher compared to other indices, whereas the scores on egalitarian democracy and participatory democracy have been historically and consistently lower compared to the other indices, suggesting these aspects of democracy in Nepal are the weakest (and hence need more strengthening). Especially concerning is the downward slope for all indices in the last few years (post-2017), under the most recent previous Prime Minister.