Measuring the Rule of Law

Abstract

This article offers a comparative review of seven rule of law measures. It demonstrates that the measures differ in both form and appropriateness and that the differences have consequences for the empirical results. The shortcomings are, among others, restrictions in scope and availability of disaggregate data, insufficient codebooks, and unjustified aggregation procedures. In most cases, the task of conceptualization is not grounded in theory, and key principles of the rule of law are left out while more inappropriate elements are included. These findings suggest that more precaution is required in the construction and employment of rule of law measures.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 119 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.