Malta vs Suriname: Varieties of democracy

Malta
0.783
in 2025
Suriname
0.781
in 2025
Malta rank
33rd
Suriname rank
35th

Varieties of democracy over time

  • Malta
  • Suriname
0.20.40.60.8190019622025

How they compare

Malta currently reports 0.783 against 0.781 in Suriname, a difference of 0.002.

The two have swapped places 8 times across 126 shared years of data; in 1900 it was Malta ahead.

Malta ranks 33rd and Suriname ranks 35th of 176 countries.

Malta has averaged higher in every one of the 13 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Malta Suriname Difference Ahead
1900s 0.1916 0.1449 0.0467 Malta
1910s 0.192 0.144 0.048 Malta
1920s 0.3553 0.145 0.2103 Malta
1930s 0.2299 0.1462 0.0837 Malta
1940s 0.3138 0.166 0.1478 Malta
1950s 0.5974 0.5091 0.0883 Malta
1960s 0.574 0.5226 0.0514 Malta
1970s 0.6852 0.5926 0.0926 Malta
1980s 0.6742 0.2738 0.4004 Malta
1990s 0.7707 0.725 0.0457 Malta
2000s 0.7915 0.77 0.0215 Malta
2010s 0.7855 0.7494 0.0361 Malta
2020s 0.7777 0.768 0.0097 Malta

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher varieties of democracy, Malta or Suriname?
Malta, at 0.783 against 0.781 in Suriname as of 2025.
What is the difference in varieties of democracy between Malta and Suriname?
0.002, with Malta ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Malta and Suriname?
126 years are reported by both, from 1900 to 2025.
How do Malta and Suriname rank globally for varieties of democracy?
Malta ranks 33rd and Suriname ranks 35th of 176 countries.
Where does this data come from?
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Varieties of democracy. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Varieties of democracy
Source
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
176 places, 29,649 data points, 1789–2025
Last refreshed

Central estimate of the extent to which political leaders are elected under comprehensive suffrage in free and fair elections, and freedoms of association and expression are guaranteed.