Socio-demographic typology of states with authoritarian regimes

Abstract

Abstract: he average global democracy index has significantly declined since 2015, reaching it`s lowest point in the past 20 years. Only 6,6% of the world’s population lives under conditions of full democracy, whereas 39,2% live under authoritarian rule. 

This article presents a comprehensive analysis of the socio-demographic characteristics of 60 states with authoritarian regimes, according to the Democracy Index by The Economist Intelligence Unit. The main objective of the study is to identify spatial patterns in the distribution of authoritarian regimes and to typologize them based on socio-demographic indicators for a deeper understanding of their socio-economic and political development. 

The study utilizes data from the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Statistical Commission, the Population Reference Bureau, the International Organization for Migration, and the World Economic Forum. For the typology, twelve quantitative indicators were employed (population growth rate from 2000 to 2024; total fertility rate; infant mortality rate; natural increase rate; life expectancy; net migration rate; gross national income per capita; average internet speed as of 2024) and four composite indices (Human Development Index, Multidimensional Poverty Index, Global Gender Gap Index, Gender Inequality Index). 

The typology of states with authoritarian regimes was conducted using the built-in methods of the SciPy library (Python programming language). Hierarchical clustering into groups was carried out using Ward’s method. Two major groups comprising four types of states were identified, each further subdivided into smaller taxons — eleven subtypes in total — based on development levels, demographic characteristics, migration processes, and social parameters. 

The first group primarily includes the poorest countries of Africa and Asia, characterized by high birth rates, low life expectancy, significant migration outflows, and severe social problems, notably very weak development of social infrastructure and limited access to basic social services for large segments of the population. 

The second group consists of countries in Asia, the Persian Gulf, and partly Europe and the Americas, with higher income levels but varying degrees of civil liberties and social development. The demographic situation is deteriorating: some countries are highly dependent on labor immigration, while others experience substantial outflows due to socio-economic challenges. Most countries in this group were either socialist or closely aligned with the socialist system as allies or satellites. 

The regional analysis showed that in Africa, authoritarian regimes are predominantly characterized by critically low living standards and high instability; in the Persian Gulf — by high income levels but restricted political freedoms; and in post-socialist and communist states — by extensive state control over all spheres of life and significant social stratification at varying levels of economic development. 

 Scatterplot analyses performed in Excel revealed correlation patterns between paired indicators — the Democracy Index and eight socio-demographic parameters. The findings indicated a weak but positive correlation between the level of democracy and indicators such as the Human Development Index, gross national income per capita, net migration rate, gender equality level, and internet speed. Conversely, there was a weak inverse correlation between the level of democracy and multidimensional poverty, infant mortality, and gender inequality. 

The analysis of the main demographic coefficients in authoritarian and other states demonstrated that the demographic situation in authoritarian states generally mirrors that of other countries in the same subregions. Social parameter differentiation does not follow a regional pattern but rather depends largely on the politico-legal situation and the cultural-civilizational characteristics of each state. 

Modern authoritarian regimes exhibit worse social development indicators compared to democratic states. Higher levels of democracy are usually accompanied by greater prosperity, technological advancement, and gender equality, and fewer manifestations of social distress. It is argued that democracy is an important factor in sustainable human development and the advancement of gender equality