Dinner remarks
Michael Coppedge
University of Notre Dame

 Solves some key challenges to measuring democracy
 Sidesteps need for consensus on a definition of democracy
 Enables people to create their own customized aggregated index
 Enables us to pursue both extension and thick intension (if done right)

 Defining even the loose boundaries of the concept
 Avoiding concept stretching
 Choosing a useful level of measurement
 Securing funding
 Recruiting, training, and supervising several teams of coders
 Sustaining commitment to the project

 The way to secure sufficient funding is to write a persuasive and practical proposal
 My focus: Realistically, in what ways can we improve on what already exists?

A preliminary assessment of today’s discussions



A set of institutions and processes that approximate political equality, i.e.,
1.
Every citizen’s preferences receive equal consideration before a binding decision is made
2.
3.
The ability of citizens to form and express their preferences is effectively guaranteed
Deviations from this principle are likely to be caught and corrected
4.
Policies are implemented faithfully and without bias
It’s a sequential, evolving process:

Election of representatives
Electoral consequences
Post-electoral negotiation
Direct democracy
Policymaking
Political organization
Checks & balances
Social organization
Administration
Preference formation and expression
Agenda-setting

 One way to improve is to measure parts of this process that existing indicators ignore
 Do we do this?
 Can we do this?

 Feasibility is still the biggest constraint: scarce information, finite personnel, time, and resources
 We cannot measure every relevant aspect of democracy
 We should set aside aspects that are tangential or controversial or impossible:
 Individual autonomy, direct democracy, coalition formation, administration…

 We can build on prior efforts
 We can define explicitly which aspects we are measuring, and which we are not
 We can thicken the concept in some ways
 We can extend geographic coverage
 We can extend historical coverage

 We can use better measurement techniques
 Explicit, concrete coding criteria
 Qualitative precision without sacrificing quantitative precision
 Multiple indicators for each concept
 Multiple coders
 Estimates of uncertainty

 So we should have multiple indicators for each likely dimension
 And we should use the highest level of measurement that we can: ratio or interval whenever possible
 Consider probabilities as the units of measurement: the probability of censure, of being able to vote, of getting a fair trial, etc.

 Theoretical dimensions should correspond to empirical dimensions, but often they don’t
 Empirical dimensions can evolve over the decades








How many teams of coders?
Undergrads? Grad students? Us?
Employees?
How would we train them? How would we train after turnover?
How much time can we each devote to this project each year?
What kind of compensation do we expect?
What is the timetable?
Do we do everything at once, or a few indicators at a time?