Ethiopia fares better than USA in Political Instability Index
Ethiopia has scored surprisingly well in Political Instability Index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). According to EIU’s Political Instability Index, Ethiopia is ranked 117th, ranking better than France, USA and Iceland. But Ethiopia’s risk for social unrest has increased since 2007. Eritrea remains to be at a high risk of political unrest as the economic situation worsens. Ethiopia’s risk is moderate. Zimbabwe tops a list of countries at very high risk of social and political unrest as the impact of the global recession unfolds, according to an index developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). Ethiopia has a Political Instability Index of 5.1 and ranks 117th, and Zimbabwe with an index of 8.5 ranks as the most unstable country topping the list. USA has a Political Instability Index of 5.3 and ranks 110. The report defines social and political unrest or upheaval as those events or developments that pose a serious extra-parliamentary or extra-institutional threat to governments or the existing political order. The events will almost invariably be accompanied by some violence as well as public disorder. These need not necessarily succeed in toppling a government or regime. Even unsuccessful episodes result in turmoil and serious disruption. The overall index on a scale of 0 (no vulnerability) to 10 (highest vulnerability)has two component indexes an index of underlying vulnerability and an economic distress index. The overall index is a simple average (on a 1-10 scale) of the two component indexes. There are 15 indicators in all-12 for the underlying and 3 for the economic distress index. Underlying vulnerability indicators are: inequality; state history; corruption; ethnic fragmentation; trust in institutions; status of minorities; history of political instability; proclivity to labour unrest; level of social provision; a country’s neighbourhood; regime type (full democracy, "flawed" democracy, hybrid or authoritarian); and the interaction of regime type with political factionalism.
