The must-read summary of Heather K. Gerken's book: “The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It”. This complete summary of "The Democracy Index" by Heather K. Gerken presents the author's diagnosis of the faults in the American electoral system, particularly in light of disasters such as Florida in 2000, and proposes a solution. Gerken suggests a ranking system called the "Democracy Index" that would incentivise politicians to help along electoral reform, as no state would want to be at the bottom of the list. Added-value of this summary: • Save time • Understand the American electoral system and its proposed reforms • Expand your knowledge of American politics and elections To learn more, read "The Democracy Index" and discover the suggested reforms to a malfunctioning American electoral system.

In this lucid and lively book, Gerken diagnoses what is wrong with the American election process and proposes a radically new and simple solution: a democracy index that would rate the performance of state and local election systems.

Based on a new data-set covering 29 European and neighboring countries, this volume shows how, Europeans view and evaluate democracy: what are their conceptions of democracy, how do they assess the quality of democracy in their own country, and to what extent do they consider their country's democracy as legitimate? The study shows that Europeans share a common view of liberal democracy, which is complemented by elements of social and direct democracy, which go beyond the basic liberal model. The level of their demands in terms of democracy varies, however, considerably across Europe and is related to their assessment of democracy: the worse the quality of democracy in a given country, the higher the respective demands on democracy. The analysis of the determinants of democratic views and evaluations shows that they depend on the political and economic (but less on the cultural) context conditions. Comparative Politics is a series for students, teachers, and researchers of political science that deals with contemporary government and politics. Global in scope, books in the series are characterised by a stress on comparative analysis and strong methodological rigour. The series is published in association with the European Consortium for Political Research. For more information visit: www.ecprnet.eu. The Comparative Politics series is edited by Emilie van Haute, Professor of Political Science, Universite libre de Bruxelles; Ferdinand Muller-Rommel, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy, Leuphana University; and Susan Scarrow, Chair of the Department of Political Science, University of Houston.

The International Monetary Fund’s Executive Board regularly reviews progress and developments under the Data Standards Initiatives. The last review—Eighth Review—undertaken in February 2012 introduced the Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS) Plus. In light of the long experience under the Data Standards Initiatives established in the mid-1990s, this review takes a longer term retrospective on what has been achieved so far, and highlights some of the lessons learned. What is evident is the contrast between the progress of countries with more advanced dissemination practices (SDDS and SDDS Plus), and the slow pace of improvement under the General Data Dissemination System (GDDS).

The Civic Space Review of Portugal provides an in-depth analysis of the national legal frameworks, policies, institutions, and practices relevant to civic space protection, with an emphasis on harnessing user input to facilitate people-centred public service reforms.

Having achieved robust economic growth and remarkable macroeconomic stability over the past 15 years, Paraguay has set a course to become not only more prosperous, but also more inclusive by 2030. To deliver on its development ambition, the country will have to overcome a number of crosscutting cons

A cutting-edge description of subnational democracy combined with a ground breaking explanation for why some regions are much less democratic than others.

This volume sets out with a discussion of the Dutch project of improving democracy and ends with a discussion of the Robot revolution. It contains contributions such as Peter Brouwer and Klaas Staal, The Future Viability of the Dutch Democracy; Hannu Nurmi, Remarks on “The Future Viability of the Dutch Democracy;” George Tsebelis and Jesse M. Crosson, Can the Dutch Electoral System be Improved Upon? Ryan Kendall, Decomposing Democracy: A Comment on “The Future Viability of the Dutch Democracy;” Peter Emerson, Can Rights Be Wrong? Towards a Less Majoritarian More Inclusive Democracy; Jan Oreský and Prokop Čech, Alternative Voting, Alternative Outcomes: 2018 Presidential Election in the Czech Republic; G. M. Peter Swann, Stalemate by Design? How Binary Voting Caused the Brexit Impasse of 2019; Florian Follert, Improving the Relationship between Citizens and Politicians; Sascha Kurz, Which Criteria Qualify Power Indices for Applications? - A Comment on “The Story of the Poor Public Good Index;” Matthias Weber, Thoughts on Voting Power and the Public Good Index; Claude Hillinger, The Case of Utilitarian Voting Christian Klamler, Utilitarian Voting - Some Empirical Evidence; Chris Hudson, Robots: Present and Future; and Bruce Morley, Robots Are Coming. Review of “John Hudson, The Robot Revolution: Understanding the Social and Economic Impact”

Drawing on years of academic research on democracy and measurement and practical experience evaluating democratic practices for the United Nations and the Organization of American States, the author presents constructive assessment of the methods used to measure democracies that promises to bring order to the debate in academia and in practice. He makes the case for reassessing how democracy is measured and encourages fundamental changes in methodology. He has developed two instruments for quantifying and qualifying democracy: the UN Development Programme's Electoral Democracy Index and a case-by-case election monitoring tool used by the OAS.

Ever since the Second World War, a new constitutional model has emerged worldwide that gives a pivotal role to judges. Against the New Constitutionalism challenges this reigning paradigm and develops a distinctively liberal position against strong constitutional review that puts the emphasis on epistemic considerations. The author considers whether the minimalist judicial review of Nordic countries is more in line with the best justification of the institution than the Commonwealth model that occupies a central place in contemporary constitutional scholarship.