Measuring Democracy and Democratic G overnance
in a post-2015 Development Framework

August 2012

Discussion Paper

4 The “ New Deal for engagement in fragile states” was endorsed by 17 states and 6 international organizations at the Fourt h
High -Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan, Korea, in November 2011. By September 2012, a set of indicators for each goal
in the New Deal’s Peace building and State -building Goals (PSGs) , will have been developed by fragile states and international
partners, to track progress at the global and the country level.

UNDP’s cross -national measurement experience





Open Government Partnership


8


9

Comprehensive governance measurement initiatives

Democracy measurement initiatives






Regional democratic governance measurement initiatives






World Bank, Database of
Political Institutions
IGO 177
Vanhanen Democratization
Index
Academic Voter turnout and
votes for smallest
parties
All countries
1970s to the
present
World Justice Project Rule of
Law Index
NGO Public survey and
exper t
questionnaire
35

1. Global targets with global indicators
2. Global targets with national indicators
3. Regional targets with national indicators
4. National targets with national indicators








3 Targets:
1. Participation is inclusive
Indicators: (Nationally defined)
2. Governing institutions are responsive
Indicators: (Nationally defined)
3. Democratic governance practices are grounded in human rights, gender equality and anti –
corruption

Indicators: (Nationally defined)

1 UNDP
National Human Rights
Commission of Mongolia
(NHRCM)
Ministry of Justice and
Home Affairs (MOJHA)
MOJHA
National Statistics Office
(NSO)
Ministry of Financ e (MOF)
1. Public perception of activities of state organizations NSO
2. Number of civil society organizations that have officially
participated and expressed their views in the process of
developing and approving the state budget
MOF
3. Percentage of voters that have participated in
nominating governors of “soums” and “ baghs”
Cabinet Secretariat
1. Index of corruption Independent Authority
Against Corruption (IAAC)
2. Perception of corruption in political organizations,
judicial and law enforcement institutions
IAAC
3. Public perception of corruption in public administration NSO

 Gareth Williams. “What Makes a Good Governance Indicator”. Policy Practice Brief 6. January 2011.
 Jan Vandemoortele . “Taking the MDGs Beyond 2015: Hasten Slowly”. May 2009
 Jan Vandemoortele. “The MDG Conundrum: Meeting the Targets Without Missing the Point” Development
Policy Review, 2009, 27 (4): 355 -371
 Tatu Vanhanen. 2003. Democratization: A Comparative Analysis of 170 Countries . London: Routledge
 Robert A. Dahl, 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition . New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
 Development, Security, and Cooperation (DSC) “Improving Democracy Assistance: Building Knowledge Through
Evaluat ions and Research”. 2008
 Brookings. “Beyond the MDGs: Agreeing to a Post -2015 Development Framework”. 2012
 Vermillion, J. ”Problems in the Measurement of Democracy”. Democracy at Large. 2006
 Selim Jahan, “Building Capacity for Democracy, Peace and Social Progress”, paper presented at 6 th International
Conference of New or Restored Democracies (Doha, Qatar 2006)
 Cheibub, José Antonio. “How to Include Political Capabilities in the HDI? An Evaluation of Alternatives”. Human
Development Report Research Paper ( 2010/41)
 UNDP. Governance Indicators: A User’s Guide (2nd Edition), 2006
 Mongolia MDG9 project and evaluation documents
 UNDP Human Development Reports, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2010