DEVELOPMENT
The pdf-version - Eesti Koostöö Kogu
The pdf-version - Eesti Koostöö Kogu
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
would be something that none of the current indices<br />
provides. Another approach, that has been suggested<br />
recently, points out that in order get a better understanding<br />
of democracy, attention must be paid not only<br />
to procedural criteria (institutions, as well as formal<br />
rights and freedoms), but also to their socio-economic<br />
context. This may mean not only the value added to the<br />
democratic institutions that function independently of<br />
the democratic institutions, but the preconditions necessary<br />
for their functioning (Munck 2012).<br />
In conclusion, it can be said about Estonia, that<br />
the assessment of our state’s freedom and democracy<br />
depends primarily on the index that you are looking at,<br />
on the states that Estonia is compared to, and what we<br />
are expecting from the concept of democracy. The position<br />
of every state, including Estonia, is determined only<br />
in comparison to other states and the more we pay attention<br />
to the indices with a high level of differentiation,<br />
the more accurate this determination will be. In the case<br />
of the Freedom in the World and Polity IV, which have<br />
a low differentiation capability, Estonia is positioned at<br />
the same level as the other decidedly democratic states.<br />
With the help of the indices with a greater differentiation<br />
capability – The Economist and Nations in Transit<br />
– it is possible to highlight some of the weaknesses<br />
of Estonia’s democracy, which are primarily related to<br />
the execution of authority, participation and political<br />
culture. These are the areas in which the gap between<br />
Estonia and the states with a high level of democracy is<br />
most noteworthy. Therefore, in order to raise the level<br />
of its democracy, Estonian must pay attention to eliminating<br />
the shortcomings in these dimensions. This is<br />
undoubtedly more difficult and time-consuming than<br />
the development of the main democratic institutions,<br />
since, among other things, these dimensions require<br />
changes and shifts in the attitudes and values of the<br />
authorities and the citizenry, which can only occur on a<br />
temporal scale encompassing several.<br />
References<br />
1. Bogaards, Matthijs. 2012. “Where to Draw the Line? From<br />
Degree to Dichotomy in Measures of Democracy,” Democratization<br />
19 (4): 690–712.<br />
2. Coppedge, Michael, John Gerring, David Altman, Michael Bernhard,<br />
Steven Fish, Allen Hicken, Matthew Kroenig, et al. 2011.<br />
“Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach,”<br />
Perspectives on Politics 9 (02): 247–267.<br />
3. Munck, Gerardo L. 2012. “Conceptualizing the Quality of<br />
Democracy: The Framing of a New Agenda for Comparative<br />
Politics,” DISC Working Paper Series (23).<br />
4. Munck, Gerardo L., ja Jay Verkuilen. 2002. “Conceptualizing<br />
and Measuring Democracy Evaluating Alternative Indices,”<br />
Comparative Political Studies 35 (1): 5–34.<br />
5. Pettai, Vello and Martin Mölder. 2013. “Estonia,” Nations in<br />
Transit 2012, Democratization from Central Europe to Eurasia,<br />
Sylvana Habdank-Kolaczkowska, Katherin Machalek and Christopher<br />
T. Walker (eds.), New York, Freedom House, 201–217.<br />
Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013<br />
73