Reflecting on democracy in a region as heterogeneous as Latin America is always a complex undertaking, one that is inevitably shaped by subjective assessments. For at least two decades, a range of intellectual efforts—often not without controversy—have sought to evaluate political performance through transparent methodological tools grounded in theoretical frameworks of democracy. The influence of thinkers such as Robert Dahl, Giovanni Sartori, Juan J. Linz, Guillermo O’Donnell, Leonardo Morlino, and Larry Diamond, among many others, has been particularly notable in this regard.
These efforts have materialized in the creation of indices that enable both synchronic and diachronic comparisons, helping to better understand political developments and formulate hypotheses that can later be tested. Such indices function as cognitive shortcuts to grasp complex realities by breaking them down into distinct dimensions.
In March, three institutions of differing nature and origin released new reports along these lines, once again allowing us to take the pulse of democracy in Latin America. These include the group behind The Economist, the Bertelsmann Foundation, and the Varieties of Democracy Project. This article focuses on the findings of the first two, leaving the third for a future installment.
The latest update of the democracy index by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), which integrates 60 indicators grouped into five categories—electoral process, government functioning, political participation, political culture, and civil liberties—suggests a slight shift in the negative trend identified last year, returning instead to a pattern of “fatigued democracy.” Scores for nearly three-quarters of the 167 countries analyzed remained stable or improved over the past year, and the global index rose by 0.02 points, one of the largest increases since 2012.
The index rates countries on a scale from 1 to 10 and classifies them into four categories, highlighting the heterogeneity of Latin America: full democracies (Uruguay and Costa Rica), flawed democracies (Chile, Panama, Argentina, Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, Paraguay, and Peru), hybrid regimes (Mexico, Bolivia, Ecuador, Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador), and authoritarian regimes (Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua). While Uruguay ranks 12th globally, Nicaragua falls to 150th among the 167 countries analyzed.
Comparing 2024 with the previous year, most countries show slight improvements—often by just a few tenths (with Bolivia as the exception, rising from 4.3 to 5.4). Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, and El Salvador maintain the same scores, while Colombia, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Venezuela decline slightly. Compared to 2020, variation remains minimal for Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, and Uruguay, indicating relative stability. The steepest declines are observed in Nicaragua and El Salvador, dropping from 3.6 to 2.0 and from 5.9 to 4.6, respectively. Declines are also seen in Colombia (7.0 to 6.0), Ecuador (6.1 to 5.2), Mexico (6.1 to 5.4), Venezuela (2.8 to 2.1), and Peru (6.5 to 5.9). The Dominican Republic records the greatest improvement, rising from 6.3 to 6.8.
The Bertelsmann Foundation’s political transformation index, published every two years, incorporates five components: state capacity, rule of law, political participation, democratic institutional stability, and political and social integration. As with the EIU index, countries are scored from 1 to 10.
Uruguay (9.90), Chile (9.25), and Costa Rica (8.90) lead the Latin American ranking, clearly ahead of a second group comprising Brazil (7.50), the Dominican Republic (7.40), and Argentina (7.35). A third group includes Bolivia and Colombia (both 6.55), Paraguay (6.50), Panama (6.35), Ecuador (6.25), Peru (5.85), and Mexico (5.60). At the lower end—though with notable differences—are Honduras (4.75), El Salvador (4.27), Guatemala (4.10), Venezuela (3.07), Cuba (3.05), and Nicaragua (2.92).
The evolution between 2020 and 2026 is more pronounced, given the index’s broader set of components compared to the EIU. Still, eight countries (Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela) show minimal variation, maintaining relative stability. The Dominican Republic is the only country to record progress, increasing from 6.80 to 7.40. By contrast, the sharpest decline is seen in El Salvador, dropping from 7.20 to 4.27. Significant declines also occur in Nicaragua (-1.11), Ecuador (-0.95), Argentina (-0.80), Panama (-0.70), Cuba (-0.48), and Mexico (-0.45), while smaller decreases are observed in Peru (-0.30), Bolivia (-0.25), and Colombia (-0.15).
Overall, the regional outlook presents a mixed picture: clear signs of stagnation, yet not enough to justify alarmist conclusions. The enduring heterogeneity of Latin America remains evident, with stark contrasts between the three leading countries (Uruguay, Costa Rica, and Chile) and those at the bottom (Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua). A more nuanced perspective, drawing on the varieties of democracy framework, will provide complementary insights—an analysis to be developed in a future article.
Machine translation, proofread by Ricardo Aceves.
Autor
Director of CIEPS - International Center for Political and Social Studies, AIP-Panama. Honorary Emeritus Professor at the University of Salamanca and UPB (Medellín). Latest books: "El oficio de politico" (Tecnos Madrid, 2020), "Huellas de la Democracy Fatigada" (Océano Atlántico Editores, 2024) and "Cuando la política dejó de ser lo que era" (Océano Atlántico Editores, 2025).
