Oman's rank slips three places to 143rd out of 167 countries in the Economist Intelligence Unit's 2010 democracy index, putting it among the 55 "authoritarian" countries-beside the rest of the Gulf Co-operation Council members.

The decline in rankings is the result of a fall in its score for political culture although Oman scores reasonably well in the functioning of government and civil liberties categories. Oman's score in the civil liberties category is the second-highest in the GCC, after Qatar. However, Oman scores zero in the category of electoral process, as Omani nationals and expatriates have almost no say in the running of the sultanate, despite Oman having an elected Majlis al-Shura (Consultative Council).

Download the numbers in Excel

The sultan will retain control over the political system

Having been in power since 1970 after overthrowing his father, the sultan, Qaboos bin Said al-Said, retains overall political authority and continues to command wide popular support. The government is appointed by the sultan, who is also the prime minister, defence minister, finance minister and foreign affairs minister. A number of government reshuffles since 2004 have had little effect on political and economic policy, given that real political power is exercised by the sultan. Any future reshuffle would therefore be expected to have a similarly limited impact, so long as the sultan remains in control, shored up by the loyalty of the security services and the strength of Oman's traditional social structures.

The elected Majlis al-Shura is politically toothless

Although the Majlis al-Shura is elected every fours years by universal suffrage, it has no legislative powers and is not expected to gain any over the near term. The next election to the Majlis will be held in October 2011, and despite concerns that the chamber's lack of political power would deter voters, an impressive 60% or so of the electorate voted in the last election in October 2007. Although it can make recommendations on legislation, it is not permitted to discuss foreign policy or defence matters. We do not expect any further progress in political reform in the October 2011 elections.

Download the numbers in Excel

Democracy index 2010: Democracy in retreat, a free white paper containing the full index and detailed methodology, can be downloaded from www.eiu.com/DemocracyIndex2010.

Note on methodology

There is no consensus on how to measure democracy and definitions of democracy are contested. Having free and fair competitive elections, and satisfying related aspects of political freedom, is the sine qua non of all definitions. However, our index is based on the view that measures of democracy that reflect the state of political freedom and civil liberties are not "thick" enough: they do not encompass sufficiently some crucial features that determine the quality and substance of democracy. Thus, our index also includes measures of political participation, political culture and functioning of government, which are, at best, marginalised by other measures.

Our index of democracy covers 167 countries and territories. The index, on a 0 to 10 scale, is based on the ratings for 60 indicators grouped in five categories: electoral process and pluralism; civil liberties; the functioning of government; political participation; and political culture. The five categories are inter-related and form a coherent conceptual whole. Each category has a rating on a 0 to 10 scale, and the overall index of democracy is the simple average of the five category indices.

The category indices are based on the sum of the indicator scores in the category, converted to a 0 to 10 scale. Adjustments to the category scores are made if countries fall short in the following critical areas for democracy:

• whether national elections are free and fair;
• the security of voters;
• the influence of foreign powers on government; and
• the capability of the civil service to implement policies.

The index values are used to place countries within one of four types of regimes:

• full democracies-scores of 8 to 10;
• flawed democracies-score of 6 to 7.9;
• hybrid regimes-scores of 4 to 5.9;
• authoritarian regimes-scores below 4.