Polyarchy

Robert Dahl used 'polyarchy' (rule by many) for existing regimes that come closest to democracy, which he treated as an ideal of full responsiveness to citizens considered as political equals that no country has fully achieved.

In Polyarchy (1971) and Democracy and Its Critics (1989) Dahl listed the institutions that define it: elected officials who control policy; free, fair and frequent elections; near-universal adult suffrage and the right to run for office; freedom of expression; alternative sources of information; and autonomous associations such as parties and interest groups. Polyarchy combines contestation (opposition) with inclusiveness (participation).

Dahl treated established representative democracies as polyarchies. Coppedge and Reinicke (1990) built a cross-national polyarchy scale, and later indices of electoral democracy follow similar criteria.

Polyarchy is procedural: poor or marginalised people may be unable to use its rights. William I. Robinson argues that promoting polyarchy abroad protects elite and business interests. Dahl's pluralism has also been faulted for understating unequal organisational power.

An analytical benchmark that separates the democratic ideal from regimes meeting institutional thresholds. Whether polyarchy is sufficient for democracy remains disputed.