Sierra Leone vs South Africa: Institutionalized democracy

Sierra Leone
8
in 2011
South Africa
9
in 2011
Sierra Leone rank
5th
South Africa rank
3rd

Institutionalized democracy over time

  • Sierra Leone
  • South Africa
-80-60-40-200196019852011

How they compare

South Africa currently reports 9 against 8 in Sierra Leone, a difference of 1.

That makes South Africa's figure about 1.1 times Sierra Leone's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 51 shared years of data; in 1961 it was South Africa ahead.

Sierra Leone ranks 5th and South Africa ranks 3rd of 51 countries.

South Africa has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Sierra Leone South Africa Difference Ahead
1960s 4.67 7 2.33 South Africa
1970s 0.3 7 6.7 South Africa
1980s 0 7 7 South Africa
1990s -22.6 -10.8 11.8 South Africa
2000s -11.6 9 20.6 South Africa
2010s 8 9 1 South Africa

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher institutionalized democracy, Sierra Leone or South Africa?
South Africa, at 9 against 8 in Sierra Leone as of 2011.
What is the difference in institutionalized democracy between Sierra Leone and South Africa?
1, with South Africa ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Sierra Leone and South Africa?
51 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2011.
How do Sierra Leone and South Africa rank globally for institutionalized democracy?
Sierra Leone ranks 5th and South Africa ranks 3rd of 51 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Center for Systemic Peace, www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm, published as Institutionalized democracy. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Institutionalized democracy
Source
Center for Systemic Peace, www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
51 places, 2,427 data points, 1960–2011
Last refreshed

Democracy is conceived as three essential, interdependent elements. One is the presence of institutions and procedures through which citizens can express effective preferences about alternative policies and leaders. Second is the existence of institutionalized constraints on the exercise of power by the executive. Third is the guarantee of civil liberties to all citizens in their daily lives and in acts of political participation. Other aspects of plural democracy, such as the rule of law, systems of checks and balances, freedom of the press, and so on are means to, or specific manifestations of, these general principles. We do not include coded data on civil liberties.