The paper reviews the critique of widely used schemes of evaluating a political system’s performance,namely Polity Project and Freedom House(FH)index,highlighting their ideological bias and methodological problems.Th...The paper reviews the critique of widely used schemes of evaluating a political system’s performance,namely Polity Project and Freedom House(FH)index,highlighting their ideological bias and methodological problems.The paper then searches alternative evaluation schemes that consider input,processes and output of a political system at the national,subnational and subsystem levels.Based on the review of theoretical and empirical studies across developing and developed countries,the paper suggests a list of indicators measuring political and administrative capacity,policy and regulatory capacity,and the level of socially sustainable development.展开更多
基金This paper is funded by Chinese University of Hong Kong Social Science Faculty Direct Grant(No.4052231)Society of Sustainability Research Grant(No.A00001).
摘要The paper reviews the critique of widely used schemes of evaluating a political system’s performance,namely Polity Project and Freedom House(FH)index,highlighting their ideological bias and methodological problems.The paper then searches alternative evaluation schemes that consider input,processes and output of a political system at the national,subnational and subsystem levels.Based on the review of theoretical and empirical studies across developing and developed countries,the paper suggests a list of indicators measuring political and administrative capacity,policy and regulatory capacity,and the level of socially sustainable development.