2025 country profile

How democratic is
Nepal?

Nepal scores 62.6 out of 100 and ranks 70 of 179 in our independent 2025 democracy measure. Its lowest-scoring test is public reasoning. Explore the evidence and history below.

Democracys.org beta estimate, derived from V-Dem v16. A measure of political institutions and conditions—not a percentage of democracy or a judgment of people.

Printable country brief Compare this country

DEMOCRACYS SCORE

62.6out of 100Substantial but incomplete

2025 rank70 of 179

10-year change−1.2

25-year change+7.3

Source-bound range55.4–71.4

Weakest areaReasoning

The source-bound range is an uncertainty guide, not a confidence interval for this combined score. How to read the range →

SCORE HISTORY

Nepal, 1975–2025

The shaded area is a plain-language uncertainty guide. Treat small score differences cautiously.

About uncertainty

BEYOND THE NUMBERS

What changed on the ground?

A documented development to help interpret the institutions behind the score.

2025 context · Freedom House assessment

A protest crisis disrupted constitutional governance

Lethal force against demonstrators was followed by wider unrest, and an interim prime minister was selected through a process Freedom House describes as bypassing constitutional procedures. The account raises two separate concerns: protection of peaceful participation and the lawful transfer of executive authority during a crisis.

Read the country report · Freedom in the World 2026

AI-assisted source summary · not independently expert-reviewed

What this context does—and does not—explain

This is a selected development, not a complete political history. Its date may differ from the selected comparison period. It is not evidence that one event caused a particular number of points, and it may describe progress even when this index declines.

The scores use V-Dem. The narrative summarizes a separate assessment by Freedom House, whose definitions and coverage differ. Neither organization endorses this website. The summary is AI-assisted, source-linked, and has not received independent country-expert review. Source checked October 5, 2026.

Why democracy measures can disagree →

UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE

What drove the score?

2015–2025 · the measured story

The score for Nepal fell 1.2 points, from 63.8 to 62.6 between 2015 and 2025. 2 of the five areas improved while 3 worsened, so the headline combines competing movements. Participation contributed the largest upward push in the score calculation.

Read the political context ↓

Largest influence on the calculation

Participation

The evidence rates opportunities to participate through civic organizations, direct democracy, and local or regional institutions more favorably.

Area score: 47.0 → 61.5
Approx. contribution to overall change: +3.1 points

Moving in the other direction

Public reasoning

The evidence rates public justification, consultation, and engagement with opposing arguments less favorably.

Area score: 63.6 → 54.3
Approx. contribution to overall change: −1.9 points

These contributions explain the calculation—not the causes. The five area scores combine several indicators; they do not identify which individual law, election, or event changed.

When did the biggest shifts appear?

The largest year-to-year movements within this period. These are changes in annual estimates, not precise dates of political events.

2016–2017+5.1 points
The overall score rose from 63.0 to 68.1. Participation supplied the largest upward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2018–2019−2.4 points
The overall score fell from 66.7 to 64.3. Rights and checks supplied the largest downward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2021–2022+1.9 points
The overall score rose from 61.5 to 63.4. Public reasoning supplied the largest upward contribution to that year’s calculated change.

Highest published score in this window: 68.1 in 2017. Small differences may fall within the source’s uncertainty.

See all five areas and how contributions are calculated

Changes in inputs versus contributions to the overall score
Area	2015	2025	Input change	Approx. contribution
Participation	47.0	61.5	+14.5	+3.1
Public reasoning	63.6	54.3	−9.3	−1.9
Rights and checks	82.9	74.6	−8.3	−1.5
Political equality	63.8	58.0	−5.8	−1.2
Elections	64.3	65.6	+1.3	+0.3

We change the five inputs from their starting to ending values in every possible order, then average each area’s effect on the formula. This distributes the formula’s interactions (a Shapley allocation). It is a mathematical attribution, not a causal estimate.

Inputs and published scores are rounded, so contributions are approximate and may not add exactly to the displayed total. No significance test is implied. Read the full scoring method →

BENEATH THE SCORE

Five dimensions of democracy

The headline score cannot show where a political system is strong or constrained. These five tests can. Each has equal weight in the beta standard.

Free and fair elections

Can people choose their leaders through broad voting rights, honest elections, free political groups, and open public debate?

65.6

Rights and checks on power

Are basic freedoms protected, laws applied fairly, courts independent, and leaders prevented from abusing power?

74.6

Public participation

Can people shape public life through civic groups, direct voting, and meaningful local and regional government?

61.5

Public reasoning

Do leaders explain decisions, consult the public, answer opposing arguments, and consider the common good?

54.3

Political equality

Do different social groups have equal rights, access, resources, and a real chance to influence political power?

58.0

HOW TO READ THIS PROFILE

Two kinds of evidence.
One clearer picture.

The score breakdown identifies which parts of the measure changed most. The country report adds documented political context. Together they help explain the institutions at stake—but they do not prove that a specific event produced a specific number of points.

Why this score differs from other democracy indices →

What a declining score can—and cannot—tell us about democratic backsliding

A recent improvement can coexist with a long-term decline. Always compare the dates, check the linked source, and consider developments the selected narrative does not cover.

ANNUAL DATA

Nepal score table

Download Nepal CSV

Year	Score	Source-bound range	Elections	Rights & checks	Participation	Reasoning	Equality
2025	62.6	55.4–71.4	65.6	74.6	61.5	54.3	58.0
2024	63.3	56.0–71.2	66.9	75.8	58.6	57.4	58.6
2023	64.0	56.8–72.0	68.5	75.6	61.4	56.3	59.0
2022	63.4	55.8–70.9	63.1	78.2	62.5	54.5	60.0
2021	61.5	54.5–69.8	60.9	79.3	59.3	50.7	58.8
2020	63.1	56.3–71.2	59.8	78.0	59.9	58.8	59.9
2019	64.3	57.8–72.2	60.6	77.9	60.3	63.2	60.2
2018	66.7	60.2–74.1	63.3	81.8	61.7	64.6	63.1
2017	68.1	62.0–75.7	66.0	84.0	62.6	63.9	64.9
2016	63.0	55.6–71.0	66.5	83.6	47.3	60.5	59.7
2015	63.8	56.7–71.5	64.3	82.9	47.0	63.6	63.8
2014	60.3	54.2–68.5	62.5	78.0	37.9	63.8	63.4
2013	47.0	41.7–52.9	28.0	49.9	37.9	62.1	62.2
2012	56.3	51.5–62.4	39.0	66.0	37.3	77.4	68.3
2011	63.1	57.2–69.7	55.6	83.7	37.0	77.4	67.8
2010	62.9	57.1–69.6	55.4	82.9	37.0	77.4	67.8
2009	63.9	58.8–70.6	56.0	82.9	37.3	81.3	68.4
2008	61.7	56.2–67.9	47.8	81.7	37.0	80.5	68.5
2007	55.2	50.5–60.6	27.4	78.2	37.2	77.0	67.8
2006	46.6	40.7–52.8	23.0	62.1	35.0	58.1	63.2
2005	40.0	33.1–45.5	22.2	42.5	33.9	44.5	62.2
2004	39.4	33.0–45.5	22.4	41.1	34.2	44.3	60.0
2003	39.9	33.5–46.0	22.4	41.0	34.2	47.5	59.6
2002	49.0	42.3–56.0	27.1	59.9	46.8	56.3	59.6
2001	53.5	46.1–60.6	35.2	67.9	47.3	59.1	61.7
2000	55.3	48.4–62.6	36.0	69.2	46.6	67.7	61.1
1999	57.1	50.7–64.6	38.8	69.2	44.9	75.3	62.0
1998	57.3	50.8–64.8	39.5	69.2	44.9	75.3	62.0
1997	57.3	50.7–64.7	39.5	69.3	44.9	75.3	62.0
1996	57.4	50.9–65.0	39.8	69.0	44.9	75.6	62.0
1995	57.6	50.8–64.9	40.5	69.6	44.9	75.1	62.0
1994	58.0	51.3–65.4	40.7	71.6	44.9	75.1	62.0
1993	58.0	51.3–65.4	40.7	71.6	44.9	75.1	62.0
1992	57.7	51.1–65.4	40.7	70.4	44.9	75.1	61.6
1991	56.3	49.4–63.1	38.3	70.4	42.0	74.2	61.7
1990	38.8	31.3–45.9	25.8	60.6	34.9	37.2	39.4
1989	22.3	15.7–28.0	11.2	35.5	21.7	23.6	23.3
1988	22.4	15.6–27.9	11.2	35.8	21.7	23.6	23.3
1987	22.4	15.6–27.9	11.2	35.8	21.7	23.6	23.3
1986	22.4	15.6–27.9	11.2	35.8	21.7	23.6	23.3
1985	22.3	15.5–27.9	11.0	35.8	21.7	23.6	23.3
1984	22.3	15.5–27.9	11.0	35.8	21.7	23.6	23.3
1983	22.3	15.5–27.9	11.0	35.8	21.7	23.6	23.3
1982	22.3	15.5–27.9	11.0	35.8	21.7	23.6	23.0
1981	22.1	15.0–27.4	10.6	35.9	21.6	23.6	22.9
1980	22.1	14.9–27.0	9.8	36.2	24.9	21.6	22.7
1979	19.1	12.4–24.0	9.4	27.7	19.9	18.9	22.4
1978	19.2	12.3–24.0	9.4	28.0	19.9	18.9	22.4
1977	19.2	12.5–24.2	9.4	28.4	19.8	18.9	22.4
1976	19.2	12.5–24.2	9.4	28.4	19.8	18.9	22.4
1975	19.1	12.4–24.1	9.4	27.7	19.8	18.9	22.4
1974	19.2	12.6–24.2	9.4	28.2	19.8	18.9	22.4
1973	19.2	12.6–24.2	9.4	28.2	19.8	18.9	22.4
1972	19.1	12.4–24.1	9.4	27.9	19.8	18.9	22.1
1971	19.3	12.7–24.5	9.4	29.5	19.8	18.9	22.2
1970	19.3	12.8–24.4	9.2	29.5	19.8	18.9	22.5
1969	19.3	12.9–24.6	9.2	29.0	19.8	18.9	22.5
1968	19.3	12.9–24.6	9.2	29.0	19.8	18.9	22.5
1967	19.3	12.9–24.6	9.2	29.0	19.8	18.9	22.5
1966	19.3	12.9–24.6	9.2	29.0	19.8	18.9	22.5
1965	19.3	12.9–24.6	9.2	29.0	19.8	18.9	22.5
1964	19.2	12.8–24.5	9.2	28.7	19.8	18.9	22.5
1963	19.1	12.6–24.3	9.2	28.3	19.8	18.9	22.5
1962	18.8	12.2–23.8	9.2	16.9	19.8	28.7	22.6
1961	19.8	13.3–25.1	10.1	19.2	14.5	37.9	22.2
1960	27.0	19.7–33.7	19.9	33.3	15.9	51.6	20.8
1959	27.3	19.5–33.6	20.7	38.3	12.6	55.6	18.8
1958	22.1	15.4–28.0	14.3	22.0	12.6	50.0	18.9
1957	22.1	15.3–28.0	14.1	22.0	12.6	50.0	18.9
1956	22.2	15.5–28.2	14.1	22.7	12.6	50.0	18.9
1955	22.1	15.4–28.1	14.1	22.0	12.6	50.0	18.9
1954	22.1	15.4–28.1	14.1	22.0	12.6	50.0	18.9
1953	22.1	15.4–28.1	14.1	22.0	12.6	50.0	18.9
1952	21.6	15.2–27.8	14.1	21.5	11.6	50.0	18.6
1951	16.5	10.6–21.8	5.4	20.6	9.1	42.1	15.3
1950	5.8	2.2–8.0	2.7	8.6	9.1	1.8	10.0
1949	3.8	1.3–5.4	1.4	7.5	6.6	1.2	4.8
1948	3.8	1.3–5.4	1.4	7.5	6.6	1.2	4.8
1947	3.8	1.3–5.3	1.4	7.5	6.6	1.2	4.8
1946	3.8	1.3–5.4	1.3	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1945	3.8	1.3–5.3	1.3	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1944	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1943	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1942	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1941	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1940	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1939	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1938	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1937	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1936	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1935	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1934	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1933	3.7	1.1–5.1	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1932	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1931	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1930	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1929	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1928	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1927	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1926	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1925	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1924	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1923	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.5	7.0	1.2	4.8
1922	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1921	3.7	1.2–5.2	0.9	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1920	3.7	1.1–5.1	0.9	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1919	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1918	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1917	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1916	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1915	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1914	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1913	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1912	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1911	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1910	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1909	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1908	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1907	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1906	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1905	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1904	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1903	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1902	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1901	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8
1900	3.7	1.2–5.2	1.0	7.4	7.0	1.2	4.8

CITE THIS PROFILE

Source and attribution

Democracys.org (2026), “Nepal Democracy Score, 1900–2025,” Democracys Standard v1.0 beta; derived from Coppedge et al. (2026), V-Dem Country-Year Dataset v16.

Open source DOI

NEARBY IN THE 2025 RANKING

#68Kenya63.5 #69Vanuatu62.9 #71Fiji62.0 #72Liberia61.5

All rankings

How democratic isNepal?

Nepal, 1975–2025

A protest crisis disrupted constitutional governance

Participation

Public reasoning

When did the biggest shifts appear?

Five dimensions of democracy

Free and fair elections

Rights and checks on power

Public participation

Public reasoning

Political equality

Two kinds of evidence.One clearer picture.

Nepal score table

Source and attribution

How democratic is
Nepal?

Two kinds of evidence.
One clearer picture.