Perceptions of Electoral Integrity Index

Every edition in one file, one row per country per edition: electoral-integrity-all-editions-nations-inquiry.csv

Electoral Integrity Index (0–100)is built fromContestation (0–100)Participation (0–100)Deliberation (0–100)Adjudication (0–100)

Every column in the newest file of Perceptions of Electoral Integrity Index: what it holds, how it is stored, and its range.

Column	What it holds	Stored as	Range, 2025	Distinct	Empty	Spread
CountrycountryName	The country’s name, as this file spells it.	Text	—	171	0
ISO Codecountry_codeIdentifier	The ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 code, added by this site. Every table here joins on it.	Text · 3 letters	—	171	0
Electoral Integrity Index (0–100)pei_indexHeadline	The headline figure: Electoral Integrity Index (0–100; higher = greater electoral integrity).	Number · up to 15 decimals	12.865Iraq88.605Swedenmiddle 54.781	171	0
Contestation (0–100)contestationPart of the headline	Whether all candidates and parties could meaningfully contest the election on a level field, 0–100.	Number · up to 15 decimals	7.15278Iraq90.27778Icelandmiddle 48.71528	171	0
Participation (0–100)participationPart of the headline	Whether everyone was entitled and able to register and vote, and every vote carried equal weight, 0–100.	Number · up to 15 decimals	0.00000Comoros95.55556Swedenmiddle 56.25000	165	0
Deliberation (0–100)deliberationPart of the headline	Whether voters had meaningful choices and access to accurate, unbiased information, 0–100.	Number · up to 16 decimals	0.000002 share it91.25000Denmarkmiddle 51.38889	143	0
Adjudication (0–100)adjudicationPart of the headline	Whether the rules were made and changed fairly, were followed, and disputes were settled effectively, 0–100.	Number · up to 15 decimals	5.85938Tanzania95.83333Lithuaniamiddle 61.45833	155	0
Election yearreference_yearReading year	The year this country’s reading describes. Readings from different years sit side by side.	Year	—	11	0
Election dateelection_dateLabel	The day the election assessed in this row was held.	Text	—	158	0
Election forofficeLabel	Whether the election assessed was presidential or legislative.	Text	—	2	0
Expert responsesexpertsMeasure	How many election experts' responses the scores in this row rest on.	Number · whole numbers	227 share it31United Statesmiddle 4	16	0

Profiled from the newest file. Range: the lowest and highest value, with the country holding it when only one does. Spread: countries in ten equal steps from lowest to highest. A higher value is the better result.

One edition, covering 171 countries.

Not in this dataset · 54 places this site covers

EIP gives no figure for these in any edition held here. It is the publisher’s choice of scope, and each place’s profile shows what is measured.

American SamoaAndorraAnguillaArubaBermudaBritish Virgin IslandsBruneiCayman IslandsChannel IslandsChinaCook IslandsCubaCuraçaoDominicaEritreaFaroe IslandsFrench PolynesiaGibraltarGreenlandGuamHong KongIsle of ManKosovoLibyaLiechtensteinMacauMarshall IslandsMonacoMontserratNauruNew CaledoniaNiueNorth KoreaNorthern CyprusNorthern Mariana IslandsPalauPalestinePuerto RicoSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint MartinSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSan MarinoSaudi ArabiaSint MaartenSomaliaSomalilandSouth SudanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUnited Arab EmiratesUnited States Virgin IslandsVatican CityYemen

1. 1 · Publisher

   Electoral Integrity Project (EIP)

   electoralintegrityproject.com

2. 2 · Their file

   Perceptions of Electoral Integrity, (PEI-12.0)

   14204594

3. 3 · Read by this site

   September 29, 2026

   Imported by a script that parses each figure and writes it down unrounded.

4. 4 · Stored as

   1 file, one per edition

   It downloads as a CSV: electoral-integrity-all-editions-nations-inquiry.csv

5. 5 · Used on

   Its statistic page, and every profile it measures

   /statistics/electoral-integrityA key for Democracy & Civil Liberties in the Country Index.

From the Electoral Integrity Project's own release on Harvard Dataverse, the election-level file, under CC BY 4.0. The project's reports print a ranking of their own; the file has no rank, so this page shows scores only. Freedom House scores carried in the same file are not used.