Measuring Governance

Researchers typically construct measures of governance through one of two methods (or some combination thereof): aggregation of the responses of a set of expert respondents to survey questionnaires, or aggregation of some set of factual data. This chapter examines the benefits and drawbacks to each methodology. By relying on expert respondents, researchers are able to ensure that a broad range of varied inputs inform their governance index. This methodology benefits from flexibility. By relying on carefully selected factual data and defined aggregation rules, researchers are able to ensure transparency and reliability, but typically restrict the set of information that influences their index. This chapter argues that, all else being equal, indexes that rely on objective inputs are more appropriate for theory testing, while those that rely on expert perceptions are more appropriate for ranking and assessment exercises.