Belarus vs Kyrgyzstan: Meaningful democratic electoral institutions

Belarus
0
in 2025
Kyrgyzstan
0
in 2025
Belarus rank
87th
Kyrgyzstan rank
87th

Meaningful democratic electoral institutions over time

  • Belarus
  • Kyrgyzstan
00.20.40.60.81179519102025

How they compare

Belarus currently reports 0 against 0 in Kyrgyzstan, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 150 shared years of data; in 1876 it was Kyrgyzstan ahead.

Belarus ranks 87th and Kyrgyzstan ranks 87th of 176 countries.

Belarus has averaged higher in every one of the 16 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Belarus Kyrgyzstan Difference Ahead
1870s 0 0 0 β€”
1880s 0 0 0 β€”
1890s 0 0 0 β€”
1900s 0 0 0 β€”
1910s 0 0 0 β€”
1920s 0 0 0 β€”
1930s 0 0 0 β€”
1940s 0 0 0 β€”
1950s 0 0 0 β€”
1960s 0 0 0 β€”
1970s 0 0 0 β€”
1980s 0 0 0 β€”
1990s 0.4 0 0.4 Belarus
2000s 0 0 0 β€”
2010s 0 0 0 β€”
2020s 0 0 0 β€”

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher meaningful democratic electoral institutions, Belarus or Kyrgyzstan?
Belarus, at 0 against 0 in Kyrgyzstan as of 2025.
What is the difference in meaningful democratic electoral institutions between Belarus and Kyrgyzstan?
0, with Belarus ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and Kyrgyzstan?
150 years are reported by both, from 1876 to 2025.
How do Belarus and Kyrgyzstan rank globally for meaningful democratic electoral institutions?
Belarus ranks 87th and Kyrgyzstan ranks 87th of 176 countries.
Where does this data come from?
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Meaningful democratic electoral institutions. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Meaningful democratic electoral institutions
Source
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
176 places, 29,649 data points, 1789–2025
Last refreshed

Central estimate of whether the country is meaningfully an electoral democracy. This includes the extent to which political leaders are elected under comprehensive suffrage in free and fair elections, and freedoms of association and expression are guaranteed.