Iceland vs Sweden: Citizen support for democracy

Iceland
2.89
in 2020
Sweden
2.13
in 2020
Iceland rank
1st
Sweden rank
4th

Citizen support for democracy over time

  • Iceland
  • Sweden
0123199620082020

How they compare

Iceland currently reports 2.89 against 2.13 in Sweden, a difference of 0.76.

That makes Iceland's figure about 1.4 times Sweden's.

Across all 22 years both countries report, Iceland has been ahead every year.

Iceland ranks 1st and Sweden ranks 4th of 144 countries.

Iceland has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Iceland Sweden Difference Ahead
1990s 2.54 1.66 0.8827 Iceland
2000s 2.44 1.62 0.8159 Iceland
2010s 2.71 1.75 0.9613 Iceland
2020s 2.89 2.13 0.7589 Iceland

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher citizen support for democracy, Iceland or Sweden?
Iceland, at 2.89 against 2.13 in Sweden as of 2020.
What is the difference in citizen support for democracy between Iceland and Sweden?
0.76, with Iceland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and Sweden?
22 years are reported by both, from 1999 to 2020.
How do Iceland and Sweden rank globally for citizen support for democracy?
Iceland ranks 1st and Sweden ranks 4th of 144 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Claassen (2022) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Citizen support for democracy. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Citizen support for democracy
Source
Claassen (2022) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
144 places, 3,104 data points, 1988–2020
Last refreshed

Central estimate of the average extent to which citizens support a democratic political system and reject autocratic alternatives. It combines responses across more than one thousand nationally-representative surveys on how desirable citizens find democracy, how they evaluate undemocratic alternatives (such as a strong unelected leader, the army, or religious authorities), and how they assess democratic and autocratic political systems relative to another.