Liberté dans le monde

By Editors Team on June 21, 2022

Freedom in the World est une enquête et un rapport annuels de l’ organisation non gouvernementale américaine [2] Freedom House qui mesure le degré de libertés civiles et de Droits politiques dans chaque nation et dans d’importants territoires connexes et contestés dans le monde.

Le premier rapport Freedom in the World publié en 1973 concernant l’état de la liberté en 1972. Le dernier rapport Freedom in the World publié en 2022 concernant l’état de la liberté en 2021. [1] Libre Partiellement gratuit Pas libre Non couvert

Origine et utilisation

Liberté dans le monde a été lancé en 1973 par Raymond Gastil . Il produit des scores annuels représentant les niveaux de Droits politiques et de libertés civiles dans chaque État et territoire, sur une échelle de 1 (le plus libre) à 7 (le moins libre). Selon les classements, les nations sont alors classées comme “libres”, “partiellement libres” ou “non libres”. [3] Le rapport est souvent utilisé par les chercheurs pour mesurer la démocratie et est fortement corrélé avec plusieurs autres mesures de la démocratie telles que la série de données Polity . [4]

Les classements de Freedom House sont largement rapportés dans les médias et utilisés comme sources par les chercheurs politiques. Leur construction et leur utilisation ont été évaluées par des critiques et des supporters . [5]

Classements des pays

Les pays désignés « démocraties électorales » dans l’enquête Freedom in the World 2021 de Freedom House , couvrant l’année 2020. [6]

Les classements sont issus des enquêtes Freedom in the World 2015, [7] 2016, [8] 2017, [9] 2018, [10] 2019, [11] 2020, [12] et 2021, [13] , chaque rapport couvrant l’année dernière. La moyenne de chaque paire d’évaluations sur les Droits politiques et les libertés civiles détermine le statut global de «libre» (1,0–2,5), «partiellement libre» (3,0–5,0) ou «non libre» (5,5–7,0). [14]

Un astérisque (*) indique les pays qui sont des « démocraties électorales ». Pour être qualifié de « démocratie électorale », un État doit avoir satisfait aux critères suivants :

  1. Un système politique compétitif et multipartite ;
  2. Suffrage adulte pour tous les citoyens sans condamnations pénales (certains États peuvent punir et subjuguer davantage les personnes condamnées au pénal en les privant du droit de vote du processus démocratique);
  3. Des élections régulièrement contestées menées dans des conditions de secret du vote, de sécurité raisonnable du vote et d’absence de fraude électorale massive qui donne des résultats non représentatifs de la volonté publique ; et
  4. Accès public important des principaux partis politiques à l’électorat par le biais des médias et de campagnes politiques généralement ouvertes.

Une démocratie électorale doit avoir un score de 7 ou plus sur 12 dans la sous-catégorie A des Droits politiques (progrès électoral), un score global global de 20 dans leur notation des Droits politiques et un score global global de 30 dans leur notation des libertés civiles. [15]

Le terme « démocratie électorale » de Freedom House diffère de la « démocratie libérale » en ce que cette dernière implique également la présence d’un éventail substantiel de libertés civiles. Dans l’enquête, tous les pays libres sont à la fois des démocraties électorales et libérales. En revanche, certains pays partiellement libres sont considérés comme des démocraties électorales, mais pas libérales. [14]

Monde

* indique« Libertés civiles dans le PAYS ou TERRITOIRE »ou« Droits de l’homme dans le PAYS ou TERRITOIRE ».

PR = Droits politiques, CL = Libertés Civiles

Pays Démocratie électorale 2019 2020 2021
RP CL Libre Points RP CL Libre Points RP CL Libre Points
Afghanistan * Non 5 6 Pas 27 5 6 Pas 27 5 6 Pas 27
Albanie * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 68 3 3 Partiellement 67 3 3 Partiellement 66
Algérie * Non 6 5 Pas 34 6 5 Pas 34 6 5 Pas 32
Andorre * Oui 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 93
Angola * Non 6 5 Pas 31 6 5 Pas 32 6 5 Pas 31
Antigua-et-Barbuda Oui 2 2 Libre 84 2 2 Libre 85 2 2 Libre 85
Argentine * Oui 2 2 Libre 84 2 2 Libre 85 2 2 Libre 84
Arménie * Non 4 4 Partiellement 51 4 4 Partiellement 53 4 4 Partiellement 55
Australie * Oui 1 1 Libre 98 1 1 Libre 97 1 1 Libre 97
L’Autriche * Oui 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93
Azerbaïdjan * Non 7 6 Pas 11 7 6 Pas dix 7 6 Pas dix
Bahamas Oui 1 1 Libre 91 1 1 Libre 91 1 1 Libre 91
Bahreïn * Non 7 6 Pas 12 7 6 Pas 11 7 6 Pas 12
Bengladesh * Non 5 5 Partiellement 41 5 5 Partiellement 39 5 5 Partiellement 39
Barbade Oui 1 1 Libre 96 1 1 Libre 95 1 1 Libre 95
Biélorussie * Non 7 6 Pas 19 7 6 Pas 19 7 6 Pas 11
Belgique * Oui 1 1 Libre 96 1 1 Libre 96 1 1 Libre 96
Bélize Oui 1 2 Libre 86 2 2 Libre 86 2 1 Libre 87
Bénin * Non 2 2 Libre 79 4 2 Partiellement 66 4 2 Partiellement 65
Bhoutan * Oui 3 4 Partiellement 59 3 4 Partiellement 59 2 4 Partiellement 61
Bolivie * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 67 3 3 Partiellement 63 3 3 Partiellement 66
Bosnie Herzégovine * Non 4 4 Partiellement 53 4 4 Partiellement 53 4 4 Partiellement 53
Bostwana * Oui 3 2 Libre 72 3 2 Libre 72 3 2 Libre 72
Brésil * Oui 2 2 Libre 75 2 2 Libre 75 2 3 Libre 74
Brunéi * Non 6 5 Pas 29 6 5 Pas 28 6 5 Pas 28
Bulgarie * Oui 2 2 Libre 80 2 2 Libre 80 2 2 Libre 78
Burkina Faso * Oui 4 3 Partiellement 60 4 4 Partiellement 56 4 4 Partiellement 54
Burundi * Non 7 6 Pas 14 7 6 Pas 13 7 6 Pas 14
Cambodge * Non 6 5 Pas 26 7 5 Pas 25 7 5 Pas 24
Cameroun * Non 6 6 Pas 19 6 6 Pas 18 6 6 Pas 16
Canada * Oui 1 1 Libre 99 1 1 Libre 98 1 1 Libre 98
Cap-Vert * Oui 1 1 Libre 90 1 1 Libre 92 1 1 Libre 92
République centrafricaine * Non 7 7 Pas 9 7 7 Pas dix 7 7 Pas 9
Tchad * Non 7 6 Pas 17 7 6 Pas 17 7 6 Pas 17
Chili * Oui 1 1 Libre 94 1 2 Libre 90 1 1 Libre 93
Chine * Non 7 6 Pas 11 7 6 Pas dix 7 6 Pas 9
Colombie * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 66 3 3 Partiellement 66 3 3 Partiellement 65
Comores * Non 4 4 Partiellement 50 4 4 Partiellement 44 5 4 Partiellement 42
RD Congo * Non 7 6 Pas 15 7 6 Pas 18 7 6 Pas 20
Congo * Non 7 5 Pas 21 7 5 Pas 20 7 5 Pas 20
Costa-Rica * Oui 1 1 Libre 91 1 1 Libre 91 1 1 Libre 91
Croatie * Oui 1 2 Libre 85 1 2 Libre 85 1 2 Libre 85
Cuba * Non 7 6 Pas 14 7 6 Pas 14 7 6 Pas 13
Chypre * Oui 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94
République Tchèque Oui 1 1 Libre 91 1 1 Libre 91 1 1 Libre 91
Danemark * Oui 1 1 Libre 97 1 1 Libre 97 1 1 Libre 97
Djibouti * Non 6 5 Pas 26 7 5 Pas 24 7 5 Pas 24
Dominique Oui 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93
République dominicaine * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 67 3 3 Partiellement 67 3 3 Partiellement 67
Timor oriental * Oui 2 3 Libre 70 2 3 Libre 71 2 3 Libre 72
Équateur * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 63 3 3 Partiellement 65 3 3 Partiellement 67
Egypte * Non 6 6 Pas 22 6 6 Pas 21 6 6 Pas 18
Le Salvador * Oui 2 3 Libre 67 2 4 Partiellement 66 2 4 Partiellement 63
Guinée Équatoriale * Non 7 7 Pas 6 7 7 Pas 6 7 7 Pas 5
Érythrée * Non 7 7 Pas 2 7 7 Pas 2 7 7 Pas 2
Estonie * Oui 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94
Éthiopie * Non 6 6 Pas 19 6 6 Pas 24 6 6 Pas 22
Eswatini * Non 7 6 Pas 16 7 5 Pas 19 7 5 Pas 19
Fidji * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 61 3 3 Partiellement 60 3 3 Partiellement 60
Finlande * Oui 1 1 Libre 100 1 1 Libre 100 1 1 Libre 100
France * Oui 1 2 Libre 90 1 2 Libre 90 1 2 Libre 90
Gabon * Non 7 5 Pas 23 7 5 Pas 22 7 5 Pas 22
Gambie Non 4 5 Partiellement 45 4 4 Partiellement 46 4 4 Partiellement 46
Géorgie * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 63 3 3 Partiellement 61 4 3 Partiellement 60
Allemagne * Oui 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94
Ghanéen * Oui 1 2 Libre 83 2 2 Libre 82 2 2 Libre 82
Grèce * Oui 1 2 Libre 87 1 2 Libre 88 1 2 Libre 87
Grenade Oui 1 2 Libre 89 1 2 Libre 89 1 2 Libre 89
Guatémala * Oui 4 4 Partiellement 53 4 4 Partiellement 52 4 4 Partiellement 52
Guinée * Non 5 4 Partiellement 43 5 5 Partiellement 40 5 5 Partiellement 38
Guinée-Bissau Non 5 4 Partiellement 42 5 4 Partiellement 46 5 4 Partiellement 44
Guyane Oui 2 3 Libre 75 2 3 Libre 74 2 3 Libre 73
Haïti * Non 5 5 Partiellement 41 5 5 Partiellement 38 5 5 Partiellement 37
Honduras * Non 4 4 Partiellement 46 4 4 Partiellement 45 4 5 Partiellement 44
Hongrie Oui 3 3 Partiellement 70 3 3 Partiellement 70 3 3 Partiellement 69
Islande * Oui 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94 1 1 Libre 94
Inde * Oui 2 3 Libre 75 2 3 Libre 71 2 4 Partiellement 67
Indonésie * Non 2 4 Partiellement 62 2 4 Partiellement 61 2 4 Partiellement 59
L’Iran * Non 6 6 Pas 18 6 6 Pas 17 6 6 Pas 16
Irak * Non 5 6 Pas 32 5 6 Pas 31 5 6 Pas 29
Irlande * Oui 1 1 Libre 97 1 1 Libre 97 1 1 Libre 97
Israël * Oui 2 3 Libre 78 2 3 Libre 76 2 3 Libre 76
Italie * Oui 1 1 Libre 89 1 1 Libre 89 1 1 Libre 90
Côte d’Ivoire * Non 4 4 Partiellement 51 4 4 Partiellement 51 5 4 Partiellement 44
Jamaïque * Oui 2 2 Libre 78 2 2 Libre 78 2 2 Libre 80
Japon * Oui 1 1 Libre 96 1 1 Libre 96 1 1 Libre 96
Jordan * Non 5 5 Partiellement 37 5 5 Partiellement 37 6 5 Pas 34
Kazakhstan * Non 7 5 Pas 7 5 Pas 23 7 5 Pas 23
Kénya * Non 4 4 Partiellement 48 4 4 Partiellement 48 4 4 Partiellement 48
Kiribati * Oui 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93
Kosovo Oui 3 4 Partiellement 54 3 4 Partiellement 56 4 4 Partiellement 54
Koweït * Non 5 5 Partiellement 36 5 5 Partiellement 36 5 5 Partiellement 37
Kirghizistan * Non 5 4 Partiellement 38 5 4 Partiellement 39 7 5 Pas 28
Laos * Non 7 6 Pas 14 7 6 Pas 14 7 6 Pas 13
Lettonie * Oui 2 2 Libre 87 1 2 Libre 89 1 2 Libre 89
Liban * Non 5 4 Partiellement 45 5 4 Partiellement 44 5 4 Partiellement 43
Lesotho * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 63 3 3 Partiellement 63 3 3 Partiellement 63
Libéria * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 62 3 4 Partiellement 60 3 4 Partiellement 60
Libye * Non 7 6 Pas 9 7 6 Pas 9 7 6 Pas 9
Liechtenstein * Oui 2 1 Libre 90 2 1 Libre 90 2 1 Libre 90
Lituanie * Oui 1 1 Libre 91 1 1 Libre 91 1 2 Libre 90
Luxembourg Oui 1 1 Libre 98 1 1 Libre 98 1 1 Libre 97
Madagascar * Oui 3 4 Partiellement 56 3 3 Partiellement 61 3 4 Partiellement 60
Malawi * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 64 3 3 Partiellement 62 3 3 Partiellement 66
Malaisie * Non 4 4 Partiellement 52 4 4 Partiellement 52 4 4 Partiellement 51
Maldives * Non 5 5 Partiellement 35 4 5 Partiellement 40 4 5 Partiellement 40
Mali * Non 4 4 Partiellement 44 5 5 Partiellement 41 6 5 Pas 33
Malte * Oui 2 1 Libre 91 2 1 Libre 90 2 1 Libre 90
Iles Marshall * Oui 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93 1 1 Libre 93
Mauritanie * Non 6 5 Pas 32 5 5 Partiellement 34 5 5 Partiellement 35
Maurice Oui 1 2 Libre 89 1 2 Libre 89 1 2 Libre 87
Mexique * Oui 3 3 Partiellement 63 3 3 Partiellement 62 3 4 Partiellement 61
Micronésie * Oui 1 1 Libre 92 1 1 Libre 92 1 1 Libre 92
Moldavie * Oui 3 4 Partiellement 58 3 4 Partiellement 60 3 3 Partiellement 61
Monégasque * Oui 3 1 Libre 82 3 1 Libre 83 3 1 Libre 83
Mongolie * Oui 1 2 Libre 85 1 2 Libre 84 1 2 Libre 84
Monténégro Oui 4 3 Partiellement 65 4 3 Partiellement 62 3 3 Partiellement 63
Maroc * Non 5 5 Partiellement 39 5 5 Partiellement 37 5 5 Partiellement 37
Mozambique * Non 4 4 Partiellement 51 5 4 Partiellement 45 5 4 Partiellement 43
Birmanie * Non 5 5 Partiellement 30 5 6 Pas 30 5 6 Pas 28
Namibie * Oui 3 2 Libre 75 2 2 Libre 77 2 2 Libre 77
Nauru * Oui 2 2 Libre 78 2 3 Libre 77 2 3 Libre 77
Népal * Oui 3 4 Partiellement 54 3 4 Partiellement 56 3 4 Partiellement 56
Pays-Bas * Oui 1 1 Libre 99 1 1 Libre 99 1 1 Libre 98
Nouvelle-Zélande * Oui 1 1 Libre 98 1 1 Libre 97 1 1 Libre 99
Nicaragua * Non 6 5 Pas 32 6 5 Pas 31 6 5 Pas 30
Niger * Non 4 4 Partiellement 49 4 4 Partiellement 48 4 4 Partiellement 48
Nigeria * Non 3 5 Partiellement 50 4 5 Partiellement 47 4 5 Partiellement 45
Corée du Nord * Non 7 7 Pas 3 7 7 Pas 3 7 7 Pas 3
Macédoine du Nord * Oui 4 3 Partiellement 59 3 3 Partiellement 63 3 3 Partiellement 66
Norvège * Oui 1 1 Libre 100 1 1 Libre 100 1 1 Libre 100
Oman * Non 6 5 Pas 23 6 5 Pas 23 6 5 Pas 23
Pakistan * Non 5 5 Partiellement 39 5 5 Partiellement 38 5 5 Partiellement 37
Palaos * Oui 1 1 Libre 92 1 1 Libre 92 1 1 Libre 92
Panama Oui 1 2 Libre 84 1 2 Libre 84 2 2 Libre 83
Papua New Guinea * Yes 4 3 Partly 64 4 3 Partly 62 4 3 Partly 62
Paraguay * Yes 3 3 Partly 65 3 3 Partly 65 3 3 Partly 65
Peru * Yes 2 3 Free 73 2 3 Free 72 3 3 Partly 71
Philippines * Yes 3 3 Partly 61 3 4 Partly 59 3 4 Partly 56
Poland * Yes 2 2 Free 84 2 2 Free 84 2 2 Free 82
Portugal * Yes 1 1 Free 96 1 1 Free 96 1 1 Free 96
Qatar * No 6 5 Not 25 6 5 Not 25 6 5 Not 25
Romania * Yes 2 2 Free 81 2 2 Free 83 2 2 Free 83
Russia * No 7 6 Not 20 7 6 Not 20 7 6 Not 20
Rwanda * No 6 6 Not 23 6 6 Not 22 6 6 Not 21
Saint Kitts and Nevis Yes 1 1 Free 89 1 1 Free 89 2 1 Free 89
Saint Lucia Yes 1 1 Free 92 1 1 Free 92 1 1 Free 91
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines * Yes 1 1 Free 91 1 1 Free 91 1 1 Free 91
Samoa * Yes 2 2 Free 81 2 2 Free 81 2 2 Free 81
San Marino Yes 1 1 Free 95 1 1 Free 95 1 1 Free 93
São Tomé and Príncipe * Yes 2 2 Free 83 2 2 Free 84 2 2 Free 84
Saudi Arabia * No 7 7 Not 7 7 7 Not 7 7 7 Not 7
Senegal * Yes 2 3 Free 72 3 3 Partly 71 3 3 Partly 71
Serbia * Yes 3 3 Partly 67 4 3 Partly 66 4 3 Partly 64
Seychelles Yes 3 3 Partly 71 3 3 Partly 72 2 3 Free 77
Sierra Leone * Yes 3 3 Partly 65 3 3 Partly 65 3 3 Partly 65
Singapore * No 4 4 Partly 51 4 4 Partly 50 4 4 Partly 48
Slovakia Yes 1 2 Free 88 1 2 Free 88 1 1 Free 90
Slovenia Yes 1 1 Free 94 1 1 Free 94 1 1 Free 95
Solomon Islands * Yes 2 2 Free 79 2 2 Free 79 2 2 Free 79
Somalia * No 7 7 Not 7 7 7 Not 7 7 7 Not 7
South Africa * Yes 2 2 Free 79 2 2 Free 79 2 2 Free 79
South Korea * Yes 2 2 Free 83 2 2 Free 83 2 2 Free 83
South Sudan * No 7 7 Not 2 7 7 Not 2 7 7 Not 2
Spain * Yes 1 1 Free 94 1 1 Free 92 1 1 Free 90
Sri Lanka * Yes 3 4 Partly 56 4 4 Partly 56 4 4 Partly 56
Sudan * No 7 7 Not 7 7 6 Not 12 7 6 Not 17
Suriname * Yes 2 3 Free 77 2 3 Free 75 2 2 Free 79
Sweden * Yes 1 1 Free 100 1 1 Free 100 1 1 Free 100
Switzerland * Yes 1 1 Free 96 1 1 Free 96 1 1 Free 96
Syria * No 7 7 Not 0 7 7 Not 0 7 7 Not 1
Taiwan * Yes 1 1 Free 93 1 1 Free 93 1 1 Free 94
Tajikistan * No 7 6 Not 9 7 6 Not 9 7 6 Not 8
Tanzania * No 4 5 Partly 45 5 5 Partly 40 5 5 Partly 34
Thailand * No 7 5 Not 30 6 4 Partly 32 7 5 Not 30
Togo * No 5 4 Partly 43 5 4 Partly 44 5 4 Partly 43
Tonga * Yes 2 2 Free 79 2 2 Free 79 2 2 Free 79
Trinidad and Tobago * Yes 2 2 Free 82 2 2 Free 82 2 2 Free 82
Tunisia * Yes 2 3 Free 69 2 3 Free 70 2 3 Free 71
Turkey * No 5 6 Not 31 5 6 Not 32 5 6 Not 32
Turkmenistan * No 7 7 Not 2 7 7 Not 2 7 7 Not 2
Tuvalu * Yes 1 1 Free 93 1 1 Free 93 1 1 Free 93
Uganda * No 6 5 Not 36 6 5 Not 34 6 5 Not 34
Ukraine * Yes 3 4 Partly 60 3 3 Partly 62 3 4 Partly 60
United Arab Emirates * No 7 6 Not 17 7 6 Not 17 7 6 Not 17
United Kingdom * Yes 1 1 Free 93 1 1 Free 94 1 1 Free 93
United States * Yes 2 1 Free 86 2 1 Free 86 2 2 Free 83
Uruguay * Yes 1 1 Free 1 1 Free 98 1 1 Free 98
Uzbekistan * No 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 10 7 6 Not 11
Vanuatu * Yes 2 2 Free 82 2 2 Free 82 2 2 Free 82
Venezuela * No 7 6 Not 19 7 6 Not 16 7 6 Not 14
Vietnam * No 7 5 Not 20 7 5 Not 20 7 6 Not 19
Yemen * No 7 6 Not 11 7 6 Not 11 7 6 Not 11
Zambia * No 4 4 Partly 54 4 4 Partly 54 4 4 Partly 52
Zimbabwe * No 5 5 Partly 31 5 5 Partly 29 6 5 Not 28

Territories and countries with limited recognition

Country 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2020 2021[16]
PR CL Free PR CL Free PR CL Free PR CL Free PR CL Free PR CL Free Pts PR CL Free Pts
Abkhazia * (Georgia) 4 5 Partly 4 5 Partly 4 5 Partly 4 5 Partly 4 5 Partly 17 23 Partly 40 17 23 Partly 40
Crimea (Ukraine) 4 3 Partly 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not -2 10 Not 8 -2 9 Not 7
Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic (Ukraine) -1 6 Not 5 -1 5 Not 4
Gaza Strip * (PA) 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 3 8 Not 11 3 8 Not 11
Hong Kong * (China) 5 2 Partly 5 2 Partly 5 2 Partly 5 2 Partly 5 2 Partly 16 39 Partly 55 15 37 Partly 52
Jammu and Kashmir (India) 4 4 Partly 4 4 Partly 4 4 Partly 4 4 Partly 4 4 Partly 8 20 Not 28 7 20 Not 27
Azad Kashmir (Pakistan) 6 5 Not 6 5 Not 6 5 Not 6 5 Not 6 5 Not 9 19 Not 28 9 19 Not 28
Republic of Artsakh (Azerbaijan) 5 5 Partly 5 5 Partly 5 5 Partly 5 5 Partly 5 5 Partly 13 21 Partly 34 16 19 Partly 35
Northern Cyprus * (Cyprus)* 2 2 Free 2 2 Free 2 2 Free 2 2 Free 2 2 Free 31 50 Free 81 28 50 Free 78
Puerto Rico (United States)* 1 2 Free 1 2 Free 1 1 Free[17]
Somaliland * (Somalia) 4 5 Partly 4 5 Partly 5 5 Partly 5 5 Partly 4 5 Partly 17 24 Partly 41 18 24 Partly 42
South Ossetia * (Georgia) 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 7 6 Not 2 8 Not 10 2 8 Not 10
Tibet * (China) 7 7 Not 7 7 Not 7 7 Not 7 7 Not 7 7 Not -2 3 Not 1 -2 3 Not 1
Transnistria * (Moldova) 6 6 Not 6 6 Not 6 6 Not 6 6 Not 6 6 Not 9 13 Not 22 8 12 Not 20
West Bank (PA) 6 5 Not 6 5 Not 6 5 Not 7 5 Not 7 5 Not 4 21 Not 25 4 21 Not 25
Western Sahara * (Morocco) 7 7 Not 7 7 Not 7 7 Not 7 7 Not 7 7 Not -3 7 Not 4 -3 7 Not 4

Trends

According to Freedom House, a quarter of all declines of freedom in the world in 2016 took place in Europe.[18]

Percentage of countries in each category, from the 1973 through 2021 reports:

1973–2021

Not Free
Partly Free
Free

Electoral Democracies

Year Free Partly
Free		 Not
Free		 Electoral
Democracies
1975 41 (27%) 48 (32%) 63 (41%) —
1980 51 (32%) 54 (33%) 56 (35%) —
1985 53 (32%) 59 (35%) 55 (33%) —
1990 61 (37%) 44 (26%) 62 (37%) 69 (41%)
1995 76 (40%) 61 (32%) 54 (28%) 113 (59%)
2000 85 (44%) 60 (31%) 47 (25%) 120 (63%)
2005 89 (46%) 54 (28%) 49 (26%) 119 (62%)
2010 89 (46%) 58 (30%) 47 (24%) 116 (60%)
2011 87 (45%) 60 (31%) 47 (24%) 115 (59%)
2012 87 (45%) 60 (31%) 48 (25%) 117 (60%)
2013 90 (46%) 58 (30%) 47 (24%) 117 (60%)
2014 88 (45%) 59 (30%) 48 (25%) 122 (63%)
2015 89 (46%) 55 (28%) 51 (26%) 125 (64%)
2016 86 (44%) 59 (30%) 50 (26%) 125 (64%)
2017 87 (45%) 59 (30%) 49 (25%) 123 (63%)
2018 88 (45%) 58 (30%) 49 (25%) 116 (59%)
2019 86 (44%) 59 (30%) 50 (26%) 115 (59%)
2020 83 (43%) 63 (32%) 49 (25%) 115 (59%)
2021 82 (42%) 59 (30%) 54 (28%) 114 (58%)

Sources: Country Status and ratings overview 1973–2016,[19] Number and percentages of electoral democracies 1989–2016,[20] Freedom in the World 2018 report covering 2017.[21]

Notes:

  • The years shown in the map and table above are the year the survey was released, the data shown covers the prior calendar year.
  • The chart and table above do not include data for related/disputed territories.

Evaluation

There is some debate over the neutrality of Freedom House and the methodology used for the Freedom in the World report, which has been written by Raymond D. Gastil and his colleagues.[3] The neutrality and biases of human-rights indices have been discussed in several publications by Kenneth A. Bollen.[22] Bollen wrote that “Considered together these criticisms suggest that some nations may have been incorrectly rated on Gastil’s measures. However, none of the criticisms have demonstrated a systematic bias in all the ratings. Most of the evidence consists of anecdotal evidence of relatively few cases. Whether there is a systematic or sporadic slant in Gastil’s ratings is an open question” (Bollen, 1986, p. 586).[3] The freedom index of Freedom in the World has a very strong and positive (at least an 80%) correlation with three other democracy-indices studied in Mainwaring (2001, p. 53).[23]

Ideological bias or neutrality

In his 1986 study, Bollen discussed reviews of measurements of human rights, including the index reported in Freedom in the World (Bollen, 1986, p. 585). Criticisms of Freedom in the World during the 1980s were discussed by Gastil (1990), who stated that “generally such criticism is based on opinions about Freedom House rather than detailed examination of survey ratings”, a conclusion disputed by Giannone.[24] The definition of Freedom in Gastil (1982) and Freedom House (1990) emphasized liberties rather than the exercise of freedom, according to Adam Przeworski, who gave the following example: In the United States, citizens are free to form political parties and to vote, yet even in presidential elections only half of U.S. “citizens” vote; in the U.S., “the same two parties speak in a commercially sponsored unison”, wrote Przeworski (2003, p. 277).[5]

More recent charges of ideological bias prompted Freedom House to issue this 2010 statement:

Freedom House does not maintain a culture-bound view of freedom. The methodology of the survey is grounded in basic standards of Political rights and civil liberties, derived in large measure from relevant portions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These standards apply to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographical location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development.[14]

Mainwaring et alia (2001, p. 52)[23] wrote that Freedom House’s index had “two systematic biases: scores for leftist were tainted by political considerations, and changes in scores are sometimes driven by changes in their criteria rather than changes in real conditions.” Nonetheless, when evaluated in Latin American countries yearly, Freedom House’s index was very strongly and positively correlated with the index of Adam Przeworski and with the index of the authors themselves: They evaluated Pearson’s coefficient of linear correlation between their index and Freedom House’s index, which was 0.82; among these indices and the two others studied, the correlations were all between 0.80 and 0.86 (Mainwaring et alia, 2001, p. 53).[23]

As previously quoted, Bollen criticized previous studies of Freedom in the World as anecdotal and inconclusive; they raised issues needing further study by scientific methods rather than anecdotes.[3] Bollen studied the question of ideological bias using multivariate statistics. Using their factor-analytic model for human-rights measurements, Bollen and Paxton estimate that Gastil’s method produces a bias of -0.38 standard deviations (s.d.) against Marxist–Leninist countries and a larger bias, +0.5 s.d., favoring Christian countries; similar results held for the methodology of Sussman (Bollen and Paxton, 2000, p. 585).[25] In contrast, another method by a critic of Freedom in the World produced a bias for Leftist countries during the 1980s of at least +0.8 s.d., a bias that is “consistent with the general finding that political scientists are more favorable to leftist politics than is the general population” (Bollen and Paxton, p. 585).[25]

Use and conceptual analysis

Criticisms of the reception and uses of the Freedom in the World report have been noted by Diego Giannone:[26] [unreliable source?]

  • “Conceptual stretching”, Giovanni Sartori’s critical term for a methodological shortcoming common in social studies.[27] Giannone reports as an example that, according to Landman and Hausermann (2003), “the index by FH has been used as a tool for measuring democracy, good governance, and human rights, thus producing a conceptual stretching which is a major cause of ‘losses in connotative precision’: in short, an instrument used to measure everything, in the end, is not able to discriminate against anything.”[28]
  • Issues with aggregation. Giannone quotes Scoble and Wiseberg’s conclusion (1981) that “the sum of a civil liberty score of 4 and a political liberty score of 2 is the same as the sum of a civil liberty score of 2 and a political liberty score of 4 even though the substantive interpretation of these different combinations is different.”[29]
  • “Lack of specificity and rigorousness in construction” and “inadequate level of transparency and replicability of the scales”, the first referencing to Scoble et alie (1981) and the latter to Hadenius and Teorell (2005).[30] In support of the latter, he also quotes the conclusion of Munck and Verkuilen (2002) that “the aggregate data offered by Freedom House has to be accepted largely on faith”,[31] due to the factors that “no set of coding rules is provided, and the sources of information are not identified with enough precision, and because disaggregated data have not been made available to independent scholars”.[30]

Time series

In “Political and ideological aspects in the measurement of democracy: the Freedom House case” (2010) which reviewed changes to the methodology since 1990, Diego Giannone concluded that “because of the changes in methodology over time and the strict interconnection between methodological and political aspects, the FH data do not offer an unbroken and politically neutral time series, such that they should not be used for cross-time analyses even for the development of first hypotheses. The internal consistency of the data series is open to question.”[32]

On this topic, the Freedom House website replies that they have “made a number of modest methodological changes to adapt to evolving ideas about Political rights and civil liberties. At the same time, the time series data are not revised retroactively, and any changes to the methodology are introduced incrementally in order to ensure the comparability of the ratings from year to year.”[14]

See also

  • Democracy in the Middle East
  • Democracy Index
  • Freedom of the Press report
  • Freedom in the World by region
  • Index of Freedom in the World
  • List of indices of freedom
  • Polity data series

Notes

  1. ^ Repucci, Sarah; Slipowitz, Amy (24 February 2022). “Freedom in the World 2022: The Global Expansion of Authoritarian Rule”. Freedom House. Retrieved 2 March 2022.
  2. ^ William Ide (11 January 2000). “Freedom House Report: Asia Sees Some Significant Progress”. Voice of America. Archived from the original on 14 October 2012. Retrieved October 13, 2012.
  3. ^ a b c d Bollen, K.A., “Political rights and Political Liberties in Nations: An Evaluation of Human Rights Measures, 1950 to 1984″, Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 4 (November 1986), pp.567–591. Also in: Jabine, T.B. and Pierre Claude, R. (Eds.), Human Rights and Statistics, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992, pp. 188–215, ISBN 0-8122-3108-2.
  4. ^ “Correlation Versus Interchangeability: the Limited Robustness of Empirical Finding on Democracy Using Highly Correlated Data Sets”, Gretchen Casper and Claudiu Tufis, Political Analysis, 11:2 (2003), pp. 196–203, Society for Political Methodology
  5. ^ a b Przeworski, Adam (2003). “Freedom to choose and democracy”. Economics and Philosophy. 19 (2): 265–279. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.570.736. doi:10.1017/S0266267103001159.
  6. ^ List of Electoral Democracies FIW20 (.XLSX), by Freedom House
  7. ^ Freedom in the World 2015, Freedom House, 28 January 2015. Retrieved 16 March 2015.
  8. ^ “Freedom in the World 2016” (PDF). Freedom House. 27 January 2016. Retrieved 27 January 2016.
  9. ^ “Freedom in the World 2017” (PDF). Freedom House. 31 January 2017. Retrieved 1 February 2017.
  10. ^ “Freedom in the World 2018” (PDF). Freedom House. 27 January 2018. Retrieved 27 January 2018.
  11. ^ “Freedom in the World 2019” (PDF). Freedom House. 5 February 2019. Retrieved 5 February 2019.
  12. ^ “Freedom in the World 2020” (PDF). Freedom House. 4 March 2020. Retrieved 4 March 2020.
  13. ^ “Freedom in the World 2021” (PDF). Freedom House. 3 March 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
  14. ^ a b c d “Freedom in the World 2010: Methodology” Archived 23 December 2011 at the Wayback Machine, Freedom in the World 2010, Freedom house
  15. ^ “Methodology: Freedom in the World 2018”. freedomhouse.org. 13 January 2018.
  16. ^ “Countries and Territories”. Freedom House. Retrieved 5 March 2021.
  17. ^ Puerto Rico *. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2016/puerto-rico
  18. ^ Freedom House (2017). Freedom in the World, 2017 (PDF). Freedom House. p. 1. Archived from the original on 27 July 2017. Retrieved 27 July 2017. [N]early one-quarter of the countries registering declines in 2016 were in Europe.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint : bot : état de l’URL d’origine inconnu ( lien )
  19. ^ Status %26 Ratings Overview, 1973-2016.pdf “Country Status and ratings overview”[permanent dead link], Freedom In the World 1973–2016, Freedom House. Retrieved 2 August 2016.
  20. ^ Democracy Numbers, FIW 1989-2016.pdf “Number and percentages of electoral democracies”, Freedom In the World 1973–2016, Freedom House. Retrieved 2 August 2016.
  21. ^ Freedom In the World 2018, Freedom House.
  22. ^ Bollen has held chairs as a Distinguished Professor of Sociology and the Director of the Howard W. Odum Institute for Research in Social Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH). Also serving as an Adjunct Professor of Statistics at UNC-CH, Bollen wrote the leading graduate textbook in structural equation models (SEM), often called LISREL models; SEM modeling allows the summary of a large number of measurements using a small number of meaningful factors. SEM was used by Bollen in the studies reported hereafter.
  23. ^ a b c Mainwaring, S.; Brinks, D.; Pérez-Liñán, A.B. (2001). “Classifying Political Regimes in Latin”. Studies in Comparative International Development. 36 (1): 37–65. doi:10.1007/BF02687584. S2CID 155047996.
  24. ^ Gastil, R.D. (1990). “The Comparative Survey of Freedom: Experiences and Suggestions”. Studies in Comparative International Development. 25 (1): 25–50. doi:10.1007/BF02716904. S2CID 144099626.
  25. ^ a b Bollen, Kenneth A. and Paxton, Pamela, “Subjective Measures of Liberal Democracy”, Comparative Political Studies, vol. 33, no. 1 (February 2000), pp. 58–86
  26. ^ Giannone, Diego, “Political and ideological aspects in the measurement of democracy: the Freedom House case”, Democratization, vol. 17, no. 1 (February 2010), pp. 68–97.
  27. ^ “Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics.” The American Political Science Review 64 (4): 1033–1053.
  28. ^ Giannone (2010), p. 69. Quoting Landman, Tod, and Julia Hausermann, indicators/GovIndicatorsEssex2003.pdf Map-Making and Analysis of the Main International Initiatives on Developing Indicators on Democracy and Good Governance Archived 13 August 2011 at the Wayback Machine, Final Report, University of Essex – Human Rights Centre, July 2003, 98 pp.
  29. ^ Scoble, Harry and Laurie Wiseberg, Ved Nanda, Ved, James Scarritt, and George Shepherd (eds) (1981), “Problems of Comparative Research in Human Rights”, Global Human Rights: Public Policies, Comparative Measures and NGO Strategies, pp. 147–171, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, ISBN 978-0-89158-858-0. Cited in Giannone (2010), p. 69.
  30. ^ a b Giannone (2010), p. 69, citing Scoble, et al. (1981) and Axel Hadenius and Jan Teorell. “Assessing Alternative Indices of Democracy”, Political Concepts, Committee on Concepts and Methods, Working Paper Series, August 2005, 47 pp.
  31. ^ Munck, Gerardo L. and Verkuilen, Jay, CPS 2002.pdf “Conceptualising and Measuring Democracy: Evaluating Alternative Indices” Archived 11 August 2011 at the Wayback Machine, Comparative Political Studies, vol. 35, no. 1 (February 2002), pp. 5–34. Cited in Giannone (2010), p. 69.
  32. ^ Giannone (2010), p. 68.

References

  • Bollen, Kenneth A. (1991), Inkeles, Alex (ed.), “On measuring democracy: Its consequences and concomitants (Chapter 1, Political democracy: Conceptual and measurement traps)”, Proceedings of the Conference on Measuring Democracy, 27–28 May 1988, Hoover Institution, Stanford University (second printing, 1993 ed.), New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transactions Publishers, pp. 3–20, ISBN 978-0-88738-881-1
  • Bollen, Kenneth; Paxton, Pamela; Morishima, Rumi (June 2005). “Assessing international evaluations: An example from USAID’s Democracy and Governance Programs” (PDF). American Journal of Evaluation. 26 (2): 189–203. doi:10.1177/1098214005275640. S2CID 146522432. Evaluation performed on behalf of the Social Science Research Council (SSRC), at the request of and with funding from the Strategic and Operational Research Agenda (SORA) of USAID (Office of Democracy and Governance in the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance), according to the National Research Council (2008, p. 28).[permanent dead link]
  • Gastil, Raymond Duncan (1991), Inkeles, Alex (ed.), “On measuring democracy: Its consequences and concomitants (Chapter 2, The comparative survey of freedom: Experiences and suggestions)”, Proceedings of the Conference on Measuring Democracy, 27–28 May 1988, Hoover Institution, Stanford University (second printing, 1993 ed.), New Brunswick, New Jersey, U.S.A.: Transactions Publishers, pp. 21–46, ISBN 978-0-88738-881-1
  • Inkeles, Alex, ed. (1991), “On measuring democracy: Its consequences and concomitants (Part I: Measuring democratic political systems)”, Proceedings of the Conference on Measuring Democracy, 27–28 May 1988, Hoover Institution, Stanford University (second printing, 1993 ed.), New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transactions Publishers, pp. 1–121, ISBN 978-0-88738-881-1
  • National Research Council, Committee on Evaluation of USAID Democracy Assistance Programs (2008). Goldstone, Jack A (ed.). Improving democracy assistance: Building knowledge through evaluations and research. pp. xvi+336. ISBN 978-0-309-11736-4.Les particuliers peuvent télécharger le rapport complet (format pdf) pour un usage privé.

Liens externes

  • Liberté dans le monde 2022 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2021 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2020 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2019 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2018 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2017 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2016 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2015 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2014 – en ligne sur Freedom House
  • Liberté dans le monde 2013 – en ligne sur Freedom House
FreedomFreedom HouseNotthe Freedom HouseThe World
Related Posts

Gaz monoatomique

Drapeau de l’Ulster

Reine femelle (glisser)

Studios Bavière

Archidiocèse catholique romain de Tarragone

Coupe d’Afrique des Nations 1986

Gueldre
Comments (0)
Add Comment