Download Dataset
Download metadata

The Database of Political Institutions (DPI): 2020

By Department of Research and Chief Economist (VPS/RES/RES)

The Database of Political Institutions (DPI) is a leading global resource for researchers analyzing DPI politics, electoral systems, and political instability data. Covering over 180 countries from 1975 to 2020, the DPI database offers detailed information on institutional structures, government stability, checks and balances, party affiliation and ideology, and the fragmentation of ruling and opposition parties in national legislatures.

As one of the most cited resources in comparative political economy and institutional research — with over 4,500 citations on Google Scholar — the Database of Political Institutions has become a cornerstone for scholars exploring how political systems affect economic outcomes and governance quality.

Whether you're modeling institutional risk, comparing democratic structures, or analyzing the roots of instability, this database provides the foundational data to support robust research in political science and policy.

Show more

Metadata & use

Identifier https://doi.org/10.60966/gn3s-at31
License Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–NoDerivs 3.0 IGO
Citation

Scartascini, Carlos, et al. (2021). The Database of Political Institutions (DPI): 2020. IDB Open Data. https://doi.org/10.60966/gn3s-at31
Published date 2021-11-02
Modified date 2026-06-25
Tags/Keywords Democracy · Elections · Legislatures · Political Institutions · Political Parties
Language
  1. English
In Series Database of Political Institutions
Temporal coverage 1975-2020
Country
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Angola
Argentina
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cape Verde
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Comoros
Congo - Brazzaville
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Czechia
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
Congo - Kinshasa
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Eswatini
Ethiopia
Fiji
Finland
France
Gabon
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Côte d’Ivoire
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mexico
Moldova
Mongolia
Mozambique
Myanmar (Burma)
Namibia
Nepal
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
North Macedonia
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Rwanda
St. Lucia
Samoa
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
South Korea
South Sudan
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Gambia
Netherlands
Timor-Leste
Togo
Trinidad & Tobago
Tunisia
Turkmenistan
Türkiye
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Venezuela
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Region Latin America and the Caribbean
Publisher
Inter-American Development Bank
Author
Scartascini, Carlos
Cruz, Cesi
Keefer, Philip
Data collection type Administrative Data
Statistical type Panel Data
Data structure Structured Data
Data notes

What is the Database of Political Institutions (DPI)?

The Database of Political Institutions (DPI) is a global dataset maintained by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), providing comprehensive, cross-national information on political systems, electoral rules, party characteristics, checks and balances, and political stability. First released in 2000 and updated through 2020, the DPI covers over 180 countries from 1975 to 2020. It is one of the most widely used resources in comparative political economy and institutional research.

What is the official source for the Database of Political Institutions (DPI)?

The official source is the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), Research Department, published as:
Cruz, Cesi, Philip Keefer, and Carlos Scartascini. Database of Political Institutions 2020 (DPI2020). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank, 2021.
DOI: 10.18235/0003049

How can I access the Database of Political Institutions data?

The full dataset and documentation are freely available for download. Available formats include: - CSV, Excel (XLSX), and Stata (.dta) versions
- Metadata files and variable dictionaries
- Documentation PDFs detailing coding methodology and changes between releases

What are the key variables and indicators included in the DPI?

The DPI contains hundreds of institutional, executive, legislative, and electoral variables. Core categories include: - Executive characteristics (e.g., SYSTEM, YRSOFFC, FINITTRM, TERMLIMIT, REELECT, EXECRLC)
- Legislative competitiveness and structure (e.g., LIEC, TOTALSEATS, GOVFRAC, OPPFRAC)
- Party characteristics (e.g., party age, ideology, religion, rural/regional base)
- Electoral rules (e.g., plurality, proportional representation, district magnitude)
- Checks and balances (e.g., CHECKS, POLARIZ, STABS, TENLONG, TENSHORT)
- Gender quota and representation variables (e.g., GQ, GQI)
- Federalism and decentralization indicators (e.g., AUTON, MUNI, STATE, AUTHOR)

What is the time coverage and country scope of the DPI dataset?

The DPI2020 covers the period from 1975 to 2020 for more than ** 180 countries, providing annual observations for each. The 2020 update extended DPI2017 by including data for 2018, 2019, and 2020, and corrected or updated over 600 variable values across 58 countries**.

What methodology and coding rules are used in the DPI data?

Each variable is coded based on primary institutional sources, including: Europa World Yearbook Political Handbook of the World Inter-Parliamentary Union Parline, and IFES Election Guide.

The coding rules follow standardized definitions for comparability: - Binary variables use 1 = “yes,” 0 = “no”
- NA / -999 are used for missing or inapplicable cases
- Coding prioritizes de facto over de jure conditions when political practice diverges from law
- Party names and orientations are standardized across time and countries

For example, the SYSTEM variable distinguishes presidential (0), assembly-elected (1), and parliamentary (2) systems; while EXECRLC codes executive ideology as right (1), center (2), left (3), or no information (0).

What are the new variables added in DPI2020?

DPI2020 introduced new variables capturing executive re-election rules and gender representation: - TERMLIMIT: categorizes limits on chief executive re-election (from “no limit” to “absolute ban”).
- REELECT: indicates whether the current executive can be re-elected.
- GQ: denotes the existence and type of gender quota (reserved seats, candidate lists, or voluntary party quotas).
- GQI: identifies the year a gender quota was implemented.

What are similar datasets for comparative politics research?

Comparable datasets in political economy and institutional research include: - Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) – detailed democratic characteristics and governance indicators.
- Polity V Project – regime type and authority trends.
- World Bank Database of Political Institutions (legacy versions) – earlier iterations of DPI integrated in World Bank research.
- Quality of Government (QoG) Database – aggregates institutional quality indicators from multiple sources.

How does the Database of Political Institutions differ from the V-Dem dataset?

While V-Dem focuses on multidimensional measures of democracy (e.g., electoral integrity, civil liberties, participation), DPI emphasizes institutional structure and political behavior, including executive-legislative relations, party competition, and checks and balances. DPI is particularly well-suited for empirical studies that link political institutions to economic outcomes.

What data on executive constraints are available in the DPI?

DPI includes multiple indicators of executive power and constraints, such as: - CHECKS: number of veto players in the system.
- CHECKS_LAX: alternative measure allowing broader inclusion of veto actors.
- TERMLIMIT and REELECT: re-election restrictions and eligibility.
- FINITTRM: presence of a finite executive term.
- POLARIZ: ideological distance between the executive and the legislature.
Together, these variables allow analysts to model institutional checks, accountability, and power concentration in executive offices.

How can researchers use the DPI for academic research?

Researchers use DPI data to analyze: - The relationship between political institutions and economic performance
- Patterns of party competition, polarization, and regime stability
- Effects of executive constraints and term limits on governance
- Electoral competitiveness and reform dynamics
- Gender representation in legislatures and executives

Because the DPI provides consistent annual observations across many decades, it is ideal for cross-country panel analysis and institutional time-series research.

What are some research papers citing the Database of Political Institutions?

The DPI has been cited in thousands of academic works across the fields of political economy and comparative politics. Foundational papers include: - Beck, Thorsten, et al. (2001). “New tools in comparative political economy: The Database of Political Institutions.” World Bank Economic Review 15(1): 165–176.
- Cruz, Keefer, and Scartascini (2021). Database of Political Institutions 2020. IDB Working Paper IDB-DP-56.
It has over 4,500 citations on Google Scholar and is frequently cited in cross-country governance and fiscal studies.

Dataset files

Load more

Additional materials

Load more