Methodology
The goal of CIVICUS Monitor is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the conditions for civil society within countries and over time. Civic space is defined as the respect in policy and practice for the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression. The state has a fundamental duty to protect these rights. The CIVICUS Monitor conceptualises the conditions for civil society as the respect for these four indicators.
The goal of the CIVICUS Monitor is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the conditions for civil society within countries and over time. Civic space is defined as the respect in policy and practice for the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression. The state has a fundamental duty to protect these rights. The CIVICUS Monitor conceptualises the conditions for civil society as the respect for these four indicators.
In an attempt to capture these dynamics on a global scale, over 20 organisations from around the world have joined forces on the CIVICUS Monitor to provide an evidence base for action to improve civic space. In order to draw comparisons at the global level and track trends over time, the CIVICUS Monitor produces civic space ratings for 196 countries. Each country’s civic space is rated in one of five categories – open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed or closed – based on a methodology that combines several sources of data on the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression.
Civic space updates from CIVICUS Monitor research partners contain qualitative, narrative information related to the situation for civil society in a country. This qualitative information is directed by a set of guiding questions and the resulting data is gathered from a variety of primary and secondary sources. In many cases, country-specific updates come directly from national civil society themselves. In countries where we do not have a research partner, the CIVICUS Monitor relies on a variety of other sources produced at the national, regional and international levels to arrive at country ratings. These civic space updates are then triangulated, verified and tagged by the CIVICUS team.
Together, the research partners posted 516 civic space updates from 12 November 2019 to 31 October 2020, which form the basis for the analysis presented in this report. For the time period assessed, these civic space updates cover 153 countries.This report analyses trends and developments since our previous report, published in December 2019. As well as global-level trends, it analyses trends in five regions: Africa, the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).
This report analyses trends and developments since our previous report, published in December 2019. As well as global-level trends, it analyses trends in five regions: Africa, the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).
Frequently asked Questions
At the heart of the CIVICUS Monitor’s methodology is the combination of several independent data sources, comprising both quantitative and qualitative data. These sources include updated ratings from civil society organisations and reports from national, regional, and international civil society organisations with relevant information on the four indicators of civic space (Freedom of association, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of expression and the state duty to protect). These external analyses are then paired with CIVICUS’ own analysis to arrive at country ratings for all assessed countries and territories, ranging from open to narrowed, obstructed, repressed or closed.
| Key Analysis | Key scores | CIVICUS Analysis | Research partners input | Civil Society voices |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reports produced on civic space by civil society | International indices on civic space indicators by international CSOs and academic institutions | Country specific reports on civic space produced by CIVICUS | Periodic narrative and quantitative reports by CIVICUS’ network of research partners | Structured interviews with national level civil society groups |
The goal of CIVICUS Monitor is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the conditions for civil society within countries and over time. Civic space is defined as the respect in policy and practice for the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression. The state has a fundamental duty to protect these rights. As the diagram illustrates, the CIVICUS Monitor conceptualises the conditions for civil society as the respect for these four indicators.
The CIVICUS Monitor combines qualitative and quantitative data inputs generated by primary and secondary research. These inputs are split into two distinct categories: 1) the base score and 2) the live adjustment score.
Recognising that indicators used to conceptualise civic space cannot be directly observed or assessed by a single measure, our methodology constructs a composite indicator to provide an overall view of conditions in each country. To do so, we created a fixed scale which establishes the range of the CIVICUS Monitor, i.e. we impose a minimum and a maximum theoretically possible value. This range encompasses a range of completely unrestricted (100) to completely restricted (1) civic spaces. Given that the state of civic space across all countries and territories vary from very restricted to more open, we can be reasonably confident that the range we set up is broad enough to encompass the variety of civic experiences around the world.
The CIVICUS Monitor uses information from its research network to constantly update a country’s score. In order to capture current events, one of our sub-regionally based research partners evaluates whether a country's current trend arches downward, upward, or is stable. Based on this input, a country rating could change at any moment.
In addition, once a year the CIVICUS team updates the indicators of the Base Score (composed of three aggregate components: key analysis, key score, and CIVICUS analysis). Based on this input, we undertake an annual analysis of countries ratings, resulting in changes that we release in our annual report: People Power Under Attack.
There have been over 20 ratings changes over the past two years. Underpinning all ratings is a numerical score which determines a country’s rating. Depending on what a country score is it could move up or down depending on the civic space situation on the ground, and for a rating to change it would need to move from the above numeral boundaries.
Open: (81-100), Narrowed:(61-80), Obstructed (41-60), Repressed (21-40) Closed (1-20)
We have constructed the CIVICUS Monitor so that all indicators are implicitly weighted equally. Using explicit weights, however, we give greater weight to national sources than to sources produced by regional or international organisations. The advantage of our approach is that we give greater voice to national level civil society organisations producing data on civic space violations. We contend that actors closer to the source are best able to contextualise information and that potential incentives for over-stating restrictions are offset by local organisations' interest in remaining credible.
The Monitor top violations for each region can be further disaggregated.
On a periodic basis and in response to developments on the ground, CIVICUS researchers also conduct structured interviews with country-based civil society representatives. Based on these interviews, the CIVICUS researcher assesses the current trend in a country and assigns an additional “country consultation” score. In addition, anyone could submit verified information to our researchers and CIVICUS team will channel that information to our Research Partners.
Ratings are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed, and closed. These ratings are conceptualised as broad bands, where a variety of civic experience can exist within any given rating category. The goal of ratings is to offer comparisons between countries and over time which are robust but responsive to current events.