Croatia vs Lesotho: Deliberative Democracy Index

Croatia
0.499
in 2025
Lesotho
0.482
in 2025
Croatia rank
54th
Lesotho rank
57th

Deliberative Democracy Index over time

  • Croatia
  • Lesotho
00.20.40.6190019622025

How they compare

Croatia currently reports 0.499 against 0.482 in Lesotho, a difference of 0.017.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 85 shared years of data; in 1941 it was Lesotho ahead.

Croatia ranks 54th and Lesotho ranks 57th of 175 countries.

Across the 9 decades both report, Croatia averaged higher in 6 and Lesotho in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Croatia Lesotho Difference Ahead
1940s 0.0273 0.053 0.0257 Lesotho
1950s 0.0742 0.0556 0.0186 Croatia
1960s 0.096 0.1141 0.0181 Lesotho
1970s 0.0969 0.0525 0.0444 Croatia
1980s 0.1153 0.0544 0.0609 Croatia
1990s 0.1399 0.1986 0.0587 Lesotho
2000s 0.5893 0.342 0.2473 Croatia
2010s 0.6164 0.4281 0.1883 Croatia
2020s 0.5305 0.495 0.0355 Croatia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher deliberative democracy index, Croatia or Lesotho?
Croatia, at 0.499 against 0.482 in Lesotho as of 2025.
What is the difference in deliberative democracy index between Croatia and Lesotho?
0.017, with Croatia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Croatia and Lesotho?
85 years are reported by both, from 1941 to 2025.
How do Croatia and Lesotho rank globally for deliberative democracy index?
Croatia ranks 54th and Lesotho ranks 57th of 175 countries.
Where does this data come from?
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Deliberative Democracy Index. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Deliberative Democracy Index
Source
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
175 places, 20,734 data points, 1900–2025
Last refreshed

Central estimate of the extent of suffrage, the freedom and fairness of elections, freedoms of association and expression, as well as the extent to which political elites justify their positions, justify them with the common good, acknowledge counterarguments, consult elites in policy changes, and society deliberates policy changes.