DEVELOPMENT

Figure 2.2.2
The distribution of the sub-scores of The Economist’s index in comparison with the group of selected countries (Estonia’s
score is in big circle)
Total Elections Governance Participation Political culture Civil liberties
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
Values of indices
3
2
1
0
Place
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
3
2
1
0
is relatively the weakest (participation and governance),
Estonia’s result is generally comparable to the states
with flawed democracies. For instance, even in clearly
undemocratic Singapore, the functioning of the government
is assessed at a higher level, and the democratic
political culture there is at the same level.
The given trend is clearly visible if we compare
the distribution of the scores in the context of the given
states from the highest to the lowest (Figure 2.2.2).
This figure can be described, conditionally, by saying
the following: the more stable and steep the decline of
the line indicating one dimension, the more the levels
of democracy in the given states differ from each other
in this dimension. It is obvious that the level related to
elections and civil liberties is high in most of the states,
and only a few states have low results. At the same
time, we can see that in the assessments for participation,
but also for political culture and governance, the
difference between the states with high and low results
is clearly visible, and the transition from the high-level
states to the low-level states is steady. Therefore, political
culture, governance and, especially, participation,
are the three dimensions that differentiate the highlevel
democracies from the low-level democracies. The
given context accentuates the importance of Estonia’s
weakest dimension – participation.
The Nations in Transit index also allows for an
assessment of some of the possible problems with Estonia’s
democracy, since it (like The Economist’s index) is
compiled so that a maximum result is not impossible
to achieve, but it is very difficult. Therefore, possible
shortcomings are more visible. For 2011, Estonia got
relatively low results in the following Nations in Transit
sub-dimensions: governance (2.25 points on a scale
of 1 to 7, with 1 as the highest result); local governance
(2.50 points); and corruption (2.25 points). Estonia’s
results have remained quite stable through the years. If
we consider the fact that the corruption, as well as the
local and national governance dimensions, is equivalent
to the functioning of government dimension in The
Economist’s index, we see that both indices, generally,
supported each other’s assessments in this field. We
cannot say the same for the participation dimension,
since Nations in Transit does not pay as much attention
to this. However, in the case of the Nations in Transit,
it should be mentioned that this is not a very transparent
index. It is not known what the corresponding
assessments are based on, and the only way to get a
better understanding of the index’s results is to read
the annual report about the states that is published
along with the index, and which generally explains the
reasons for the scores in the index. 5
The Polity IV index, which gives Estonia relatively
high marks, also directs attention to the problems
related to participation, as does The Economist’s index 6 .
In the case of Estonia, it is the imperfect electoral rights
of the Russian-speaking population in the parliamentary
elections, which, in turn, affects democracy as it
relates to the execution of executive authority. At the
same time, the report directs attention to the fact that
the corresponding discrimination is only indirect, and
results from the decisions related to citizenship policies
made when the state was established. Direct ethnic discrimination
by the government was not noticed, but it is
mentioned that, in the society as a whole, there is a low
level of readiness for cultural integration.
But, despite the aforementioned shortcomings and
weaknesses, one should still note that Estonia’s position,
5 e.g. Pettai ja Mölder 2013.
6 A more detailed explanation of the given assessment, along with the index for Estonia, is published in the following report: http://www.
systemicpeace.org/polity/Estonia2010.pdf
Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013
71