The world has seen an increase in populist and nationalist movements that are challenging traditional democratic norms and institutions in various countries, including the United States, Brazil, and countries in Europe. While some authoritarian governments are using technology and surveillance techniques to curtail democratic activity, the rampant proliferation of misinformation and disinformation online – in particular around surveillance and privacy – has influenced public opinion. In some cases, it’s undermined the integrity of democratic processes and led to social polarization, spurring social unrest in some places.

And so, depending on who you speak to and which matrices you use, there is somewhat of a consensus that there has been an increase in authoritarianism and democratic backsliding in the last two decades (V-Dem say that it is up to 72% of the world’s population that are now living in authoritarian states). These are spurred on by weak institutions that leave vulnerable democracies open to corruption, manipulation, and external pressures.

That said, there are a number of bright spots that we have seen through the work we do that open up opportunities for practitioners, funders, and supporters of the democracy project. In this big election year as 49% of the world, or 64 countries, head to the polls, we need to jump on these opportunities.

TECH FOR CIVIC ENGAGEMENT

Firstly, we must harness technology for enhanced civic engagement, transparency, and accountability through digital platforms and tools. This has already proven to be a boon for the democracy agenda. To ensure we do not leave marginalized communities behind, we need private sector and government collaborations that help us increase access to the internet so that we can ultimately bridge the digital divide. On that note, we need commitments to and practical implementation of open data standards. Lack of access to justice and corruption breed in opaque space and citizens are only truly equipped to hold leaders and institutions accountable when public data is put in their hands.

DIVERSITY IN DECISION-MAKING

We have an opportunity to embrace inclusivity, diversity, and representation in decision-making processes. Building equity, inclusion and accountability into any process is expensive. It takes human and financial resources to create meaningful spaces for participation. We must look at whether the incentives for participation outweigh the time and monetary sacrifices that civil society leaders inevitably need to make?

MULTI-STAKEHOLDER COOPERATION

There have been a few ‘action forcing events’ in the governance space and the Summit for Democracy (S4D) is one of them. It is a rare unique opportunity for civil society, government, philanthropy and the public sector to address global challenges and engage with the democracy agenda on a global scale. Through this process we sample-survey citizens from across our network on what they knew about the S4D along with more general questions around elections, democracy, the media and free speech. Questions were tailored to the commitments that country leaders made and while 50% of those surveyed knew about the Summit for Democracy, only 25% knew what commitments their power holders had made. Lessons learned from these sorts of processes must inform our efforts to build coalitions. We need to be intentional and specific about our convening and ensure that the coalitions that come from these action-forcing events are connected to one another.

CLOSING THE PROXIMITY GAP

As the localization agenda powers on, we must close the proximity gap between global and national civil society, academia and governments, and local civil society and communities that are often worst affected by democratic backsliding. Other problems like mis and disinformation are better tackled when there is strong coordination and support between partners. The democracy agenda can only benefit from an inclusive, bottom-up approach.

Jean Scrimgeour