The problem of indexing with its important role in the study of democracy is emphasized which enables formalized approach to democracy and allows evaluating efficiency of political system transformation . The methodological approaches to indexing democracy are considered. Both the author’s approaches to determining the level of democracy in the world (the Ph. Cutright Index of Political Democracy, the K. Bollen Index of Political Democracy, the K. Herpfer Democracy Index) and approaches and projects of international scientific and public institutions (The Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index, the Freedom House project “Nations in Transit”, the Bertelsmann Foundation Transformation Index, the Index of Democratization created by scientists of the University of Helsinki led by T. Vanhanen, the “Political atlas of modernity” project carried out by the Moscow State Institute of International Relations led by A. Melville, approach to the development of criteria for a democratic regime by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA). Each of the approaches to defining of democracy was subjected to qualitative assessment, their positive and negative aspects, efficiency and level of results reliability were shown. The important role which democratic elections play in each of the methods of indexing democratic political regime was emphasized. It is assumed that formalized approach to democracy and determining its level can be applied to its attributive elements, in particular, to the institute of elections. This enables development of methodology for determining the democratic level of elections which is extremelly important since Ukrainian political science lacks such a methodology.
1. Antanovich N. A. Indeksyi kak izmeritelnyiy instrument v politologii [Elektronnyi resurs] / N. A. Antanovich // VestnIk Brestskaga unIversIteta. Seryiya 1. FIlasofIya. PalItalogIya. SatsyiyalogIya. – 2010. – No. 1. – S. 51–60. – Rezhym dostupu: www.law.bsu.by/pub/32/Antanovich_9.doc. 2. Vanhanen T. Demokratizatsiya v sravnenii [Elektronnyi resurs] / T. Vanhanen // Institut Obschestvennogo Proektirovaniya. – Rezhym dostupu: http://www.inop.ru\files\vanhanen.doc. 3. Melvil A. Yu. Opyit klassifikatsii stran / A. Yu. Melvil, M. V. Ilin, E.Yu. Meleshkina i dr. // POLIS (Politicheskie issledovaniya). – 2006. – No. 5. –
S. 15–38; 4. Melvil A. Yu. Politicheskiy atlas sovremennosti: zamyisel i obschie teoretiko-metodologicheskie konturyi proekta / A. Yu. Melvil // POLIS (Politicheskie issledovaniya). – 2006. – No. 5. – S. 6–14; 5. Otsenka urovnya razvitiya demokratii: osnovyi obschey shemyi Mezhdunarodnogo instituta demokratii i sodeystviya vyiboram [Elektronnyi resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu: http://www.idea.int/publications/sod/upload/demo _ass_inlay_ russ_L.pdf 6. Raikovskyi B. Kryterii demokratyzatsii vyborchoho protsesu: analiz kontseptsii / B. Raikovskyi // Visnyk Tsentralnoi vyborchoi komisii. – 2007. – No. 1 (7). –
S. 32–37. 7. Herpfer K. Novyiy indeks demokratii. Demokratizatsiya obschestvennosti v pyatnadtsati gosudarstvah Tsentralnoy i Vostochnoy Evropyi (1991–1998) / K. Herpfer // Sotsiologiya: teoriya, metodyi, marketing. – 2001. – No. 3. – S. 123–150.
8. Bollen K. M. World System Position, Dependence, and Democracy: The Cross – National Evidence / K. M. Bollen // American Sociological Review. – 1983. – Vol. 48, No. 4. – P. 468–479. 9. Cutright Ph. National Political Development: Measurment and Analysis / Ph. Cutright // American Sociological Review. – 1963. – Vol. 28. No. 1. – P. 195–196;
10. Nations in Transit 2013. Methodology [Elektronnyi resurs] / Freedom House. – Rezhym dostupu: https://freedomhouse.org/ report/nations-transit-2013/nations-transit-2013-methodology 11. The Economist Intelligence Unit‘s Index of Democracy 2012 [Elektronnyi resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu: http://www.eiu.com/public/topical_report.aspx? campaignid= DemocracyIndex12; 12. Transformation Index BTI. Methodology [Elektronnyi resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu: http://www.bti-project.org/en/index/methodology/