Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Which countries have shown the most significant improvement in democracy indices since 2020?
Executive Summary
Since 2020, multiple indices and reports point to a small set of countries that have shown measurable improvements in democratic performance, most consistently named are Botswana, South Africa, Portugal, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Jordan, Fiji, the Maldives, Chile, Brazil, Poland, Thailand and Zambia. The evidence is mixed across sources: institutional reports highlight upgrades to “full democracy” status for some European states and notable recoveries or improvements in electoral credibility and parliamentary effectiveness in several African, Asian and Pacific states, while other indices emphasize an overwhelmingly negative global trend since 2020, limiting the number and magnitude of genuine democratic gains [1] [2].
1. A Short List of Countries Cited as Improving — Who’s on it?
The assembled analyses consistently list a core group of countries repeatedly recognized for improvements: Botswana, South Africa, Portugal, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Jordan, Fiji, the Maldives, Chile, Brazil and Poland. Botswana and South Africa are singled out for gains in credible elections, Portugal, Estonia and the Czech Republic for promotions to “full democracy” in one major index, and Jordan, Fiji and the Maldives for improvements across multiple democratic dimensions, including parliamentary function and electoral processes [1] [2]. Thailand and Zambia are separately highlighted for reversals of democratic decline, indicating recovery rather than steady improvement [3].
2. Which Metrics Drive These Claims — Elections, Parliaments, or Scores?
Different reports emphasize different components of democracy: one source underlines credible elections and parliamentary effectiveness as the main areas of improvement for Botswana, South Africa and Jordan, while the Economist Intelligence Unit framed upgrades in its index primarily as overall score thresholds that reclassified Portugal, Estonia and the Czech Republic as “full democracies.” The disparity matters: upgrading across a composite index can reflect small gains across multiple subcomponents or a single major reform, whereas case studies centred on elections or parliaments capture specific institutional recovery [1] [2].
3. Timing and Scope: Are These Improvements Since 2020 or Shorter-Term Recoveries?
The analyses point to improvements measured since 2020, but the temporal framing is uneven. The Global State of Democracy 2025 explicitly references changes “since 2020” and lists a cluster of countries making progress by 2025, whereas the EIU’s 2024 Democracy Index notes upgrades in 2024 for some European states that may reflect cumulative trends beginning earlier. Media summaries that credit Thailand and Zambia with successful reversals focus on more recent, targeted recoveries rather than long-term upward trajectories. This distinction matters: some gains are sustained multi-year trends, others are shorter-term rebounds [1] [2] [3].
4. Contrasting Viewpoint: Overall Global Democracy Is Still Weakening
A persistent counterpoint across the material is that global democracy broadly declined even as a minority of countries improved. The EIU 2024 index and other global reviews emphasize that far more countries autocratized than democratized in recent years, with only a limited number exhibiting improvements; one analysis reported 45 autocratizing versus 19 democratizing countries in 2024. This context means improvements in selected states do not indicate a reversal of the global downward trend, and headline “gains” must be read against a backdrop of larger systemic erosion [2] [4].
5. Where Sources Agree — and Where They Diverge
There is consistent agreement that a handful of countries registered notable positive changes, particularly in electoral credibility and index reclassifications. Divergences arise over magnitude and significance: the Global State of Democracy names a broader group including several non-Western states, while the EIU emphasizes European upgrades and stresses the limited scale of global gains. Another source provided no relevant details, underscoring that coverage and methodological differences shape which countries appear on “improvement” lists [1] [2] [5].
6. Possible Agendas and Methodological Caveats to Watch
Each source carries potential biases: institutional indices may privilege quantifiable indicators and threshold effects (leading to “upgrade” headlines), whereas narrative articles may highlight politically salient reversals to craft an optimistic story. Reports noting more democratizing countries may be responding to donor or advocacy audiences eager to identify success stories, while critical indices aim for comparability and may understate context-specific democratic resilience. These agendas and methodological choices affect which countries are named and how meaningful gains are judged [2] [4] [3].
7. Bottom Line and What’s Missing from the Record
The most defensible conclusion is that a relatively small set of countries has shown measurable democratic improvement since 2020, with Botswana, South Africa, Jordan, Fiji, the Maldives, Portugal, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Chile, Brazil, Poland, Thailand and Zambia recurring across analyses. However, the evidence is uneven: some gains are specific (elections, parliaments), some are index reclassifications, and no source, taken alone, proves a broad reversal of the global decline in democracy. Readers should treat headline upgrades as meaningful but limited, and seek detailed country case studies for a fuller assessment [1] [2] [3].