Georgia ranks as a hybrid regime

Georgia's score in the Economist Intelligence Unit's 2010 Democracy Index improves marginally, to 4.59 (out of 10). Georgia is ranked 103rd out of 167 countries, an improvement on its previous rank of 104th, placing it among the 33 countries classified as hybrid regimes. Other members of the former Soviet Union in this classification are Armenia, Russia and the Kyrgyz Republic.

Download the numbers in Excel

The potential for unrest will rise in the run-up to the elections

Georgia's poorest score is for the category of government functioning, reflecting the fact that the government's authority does not extend over the whole country, with South Ossetia and Abkhazia both having declared their independence in 2008. Factors such as corruption and low public confidence in the government also detract from the score, as does the lack of accountability of the government, and the absence of a properly functioning system of checks and balances. Georgia scores relatively poorly for the categories assessing political culture and political participation, reflecting factors such as low public involvement in political parties.

Its scores for civil liberties and electoral process, however, are much higher. Observance of civil rights is higher than in other countries in the former Soviet Union, and electoral procedures have improved since the "Rose Revolution" of 2003. The mayoral election in the capital, Tbilisi, in 2010 showed progress in this area compared with the presidential and parliamentary elections in 2008.

The global economic and financial crisis affected Georgia through falling remittances, which led to a downturn in domestic demand. The economy was also affected by much weaker external demand for its main exports, especially goods such as ferrous metals. After contracting by 3.8% in 2009, real GDP returned to growth in 2010, expanding by an estimated 6.1%. Sectors such as construction and transport, which were affected by the war with Russia in August 2008, have started to show signs of robust recovery. Despite the improvement in the economic outlook, and the increased stability of the political scene compared with recent years, there is a possibility that social unrest will rise in the run-up to the parliamentary election, which is scheduled to be held in 2012, and ahead of the presidential election due in 2013. The potential for public protests to turn violent cannot be excluded, particularly if the authorities decide to use force to break up demonstrations.

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 indexes.

The category indexes 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.