Sitemap
Party financing
Following the SGI codebook, the country’s performance has been assessed on a scale from 1 to 10.
#
Score 2011
| 1 | Belgium | 10 |
|
| 2 | Australia | 9 |
|
| 2 | Denmark | 9 |
|
| 2 | New Zealand | 9 |
|
| 2 | Norway | 9 |
|
| 6 | Canada | 8 |
|
| 6 | Germany | 8 |
|
| 6 | Ireland | 8 |
|
| 6 | Italy | 8 |
|
| 6 | Luxembourg | 8 |
|
| 6 | Mexico | 8 |
|
| 6 | Poland | 8 |
|
| 6 | USA | 8 |
|
| 14 | Czech Rep. | 7 |
|
| 14 | France | 7 |
|
| 14 | Portugal | 7 |
|
| 14 | Sweden | 7 |
|
| 18 | Finland | 6 |
|
| 18 | Iceland | 6 |
|
| 18 | Japan | 6 |
|
| 18 | Slovakia | 6 |
|
| 18 | UK | 6 |
|
| 23 | Austria | 5 |
|
| 23 | Chile | 5 |
|
| 23 | Spain | 5 |
|
| 26 | South Korea | 4 |
|
| 26 | Turkey | 4 |
|
| 28 | Hungary | 3 |
|
| 29 | Greece | 2 |
|
| 29 | Netherlands | 2 |
|
| 31 | Switzerland | 1 |
10
Question
Is party financing transparent and effectively monitored? Are violations deterred?
Indicator Design
Party financing: texts + scores are based on independent assessments by two experts. Results were adjusted for cross-national consistency by the regional coordinator and SGI board.
Download Scores
