Using a Bayesian latent variable approach, we synthesize a new measure of democracy, the Unified Democracy Scores (UDS), from 10 extant scales. Our measure eschews the difficult—and often arbitrary—decision to use one existing democracy scale over another in favor of a cumulative approach that allows us to simultaneously leverage the measurement efforts of numerous scholars. The result of this cumulative approach is a measure of democracy that, for every country-year, is at least as reliable as the most reliable component measure and is accompanied by quantitative estimates of uncertainty in the level of democracy. Moreover, for those who wish to continue using previously existing scales or to evaluate research performed using those scales, we extract information from the new measure to perform heretofore impossible direct comparisons between component scales. Specifically, we estimate the relative reliability of the constituent indicators, compare the specific ordinal levels of each of the existing measures in relationship to one another and assess overall levels of disagreement across raters. We make the UDS and associated parameter estimates freely available online and provide a detailed tutorial that demonstrates how to best use the UDS in applied work.
Constitutions are supposed to provide an enduring structure for politics. Yet only half live more than nine years. Why is it that some constitutions endure while others do not? In The Endurance of National Constitutions Zachary Elkins, Tom Ginsburg and James Melton examine the causes of constitutional endurance from an institutional perspective. Supported by an original set of cross-national historical data, theirs is the first comprehensive study of constitutional mortality. They show that whereas constitutions are imperilled by social and political crises, certain aspects of a constitution's design can lower the risk of death substantially. Thus, to the extent that endurance is desirable - a question that the authors also subject to scrutiny - the decisions of founders take on added importance.
It is often asserted that the United States' Constitution is the world's most difficult to amend. 2 Depending on one's normative perspective, this fact is either seen as a reflection of the Constitution's genius and a key to its endurance, or as a barrier to modernization. 3 But virtually all observers agree on the basic fact of difficulty. The question is: how do we really know this? Is it because the constitution has been amended infrequently over a long period? By that metric, the Constitution of Japan of 1946, which has never been amended despite occasional proposals to do so, should rank as the world's most difficult. Is it because the U.S. process of amendment involves multiple steps with high thresholds of agreement? It isn't clear that Article V scores highest on this metric, even if casual observation makes it seem as if the process is difficult. Determining which constitutions are flexible and which are not is an important question. Flexibility creates the conditions for constitutional stability. As noted by Alexander Hamilton, the ability to remedy defects and unintended consequences of a constitutional text can make constitutions more enduring. 4 As political practices change over time, adjustments to the
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.