Various indices and ratings describing democratic processes in countries around the world have been developed by international organizations (such as Freedom House) and analytical centers (such as the one affiliated with the journal Economist). The main drawback of such ratings is that they only provide a linear ordering of countries by averaging a multitude of criteria. Such approach does not make it obvious which particular problems exist in which countries and thus does not help comparing democratic processes in different countries. In this paper, we propose a multidimensional model for ratings based on a mathematical discipline of formal concept analysis, which deals; in particular, with automated taxonomy construction from object attribute data. In our case, every node of taxonomy would group countries similar in certain aspects, while at the same time providing a description of these aspects.
The article aims to explore the use of neutral mathematical methods such as Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) in political studies, and in democracy research in particular. As democracy ratings are a frequently used tool for democracy studies, the article concentrates on identifying the problems which arise with their use and suggests the methods to address these concerns. While Average linear representation of rating results reduces the opportunities for interpretation and analysis of the data, the FCA methods enable us to present and analyze ratings as hierarchical structures of democracy-related parameters and country scores. The article explores another problem with democracy ratings – contradictory evaluations of different agencies – by comparison of different ratings (such as Freedom House, The Economist etc.). After analyzing the results of applying FCA methods to democracy ratings data, the authors conclude that the method holds positive opportunities for further use in democracy studies, and suggest several venues of research to be explored.
The aim is not to question the existing ratings, but rather to provide a neutral instrument for uncovering the structure of the data underlying these ratings. The proposed representation is much more informative than linear ratings, since it shows the commonalities and differences in the democratic development of various countries. In addition, it provides a solid ground for discussing, comparing, and criticizing ratings. It can also help formulate theoretical hypotheses on the evolution of democracy, thereby advancing scientific discovery.
