placestats

Civil liberties (FH) vs. Redistribution

Fades after adjusting for income

Across 45 countries, Civil liberties (FH) and Redistribution rise and fall together at r = -0.55 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to -0.34, which could easily be chance (q = 0.083, allowing for the many pairs tested, and allowing for countries in the same region being alike). So the first figure mostly shows richer countries differing from poorer ones, not a link between these two things. Caution: correlation moves sharply once outliers are trimmed.

Comparing countries across the middle half of civil liberties (fh), 1 to 2 points, redistribution is 4.76% reduction in the Gini lower at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 2.61% reduction in the Gini.

Link before adjusting (r)-0.551p = 8.7e-5 · 45 countries
After adjusting for national income-0.345p = 0.022 · likely range [-0.58, -0.05]
p, allowing for regions0.013standard error 0.098 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.083across 12,497 pairs

How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.

Civil liberties (FH) · rating (1-7, 1 = most free)link with income -0.49 · moderate
Redistribution · % reduction in the Ginilink with income +0.50 · moderate

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

Civil liberties (FH) · rating (1-7, 1 = most free) →Redistribution · % reduction in the Gini →162.67%48.3%Australia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 27.7% reduction in the GiniAustria: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 41.4% reduction in the GiniBelgium: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 47.7% reduction in the GiniBulgaria: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 26% reduction in the GiniBrazil: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 13.8% reduction in the GiniCanada: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 29.3% reduction in the GiniSwitzerland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 21.2% reduction in the GiniChile: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 8.68% reduction in the GiniChina: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 6.22% reduction in the GiniCosta Rica: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 12.6% reduction in the GiniCzechia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 43.5% reduction in the GiniGermany: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 38.7% reduction in the GiniDenmark: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 37.5% reduction in the GiniSpain: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 34.4% reduction in the GiniEstonia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 33.5% reduction in the GiniFinland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 47.2% reduction in the GiniFrance: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 42.2% reduction in the GiniUnited Kingdom: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 29.7% reduction in the GiniGreece: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 36.9% reduction in the GiniCroatia: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 33.1% reduction in the GiniHungary: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 29.4% reduction in the GiniIndia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 2.67% reduction in the GiniIreland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 41.2% reduction in the GiniIceland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 35.7% reduction in the GiniIsrael: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 23.2% reduction in the GiniItaly: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 36.2% reduction in the GiniJapan: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 34.1% reduction in the GiniKorea, Rep.: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 18.2% reduction in the GiniLithuania: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 29.7% reduction in the GiniLuxembourg: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 35.7% reduction in the GiniLatvia: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 28.1% reduction in the GiniMexico: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 3.77% reduction in the GiniNetherlands: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 34.2% reduction in the GiniNorway: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 39.5% reduction in the GiniNew Zealand: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 28.7% reduction in the GiniPoland: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 41.9% reduction in the GiniPortugal: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 36.5% reduction in the GiniRomania: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 38.1% reduction in the GiniRussian Federation: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 27% reduction in the GiniSlovak Republic: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 48.3% reduction in the GiniSlovenia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 42.4% reduction in the GiniSweden: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 33.1% reduction in the GiniTurkiye: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 18.6% reduction in the GiniUnited States: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 22.1% reduction in the GiniSouth Africa: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 12.8% reduction in the GiniBELCHECHLCHNCRIFINFRAINDRUSSVKTUR

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted-0.5518.7e-545
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted-0.5040.00045
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income-0.3450.02245
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income-0.3000.04845

The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 45 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.207 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from -0.412 (without CHL) to -0.276 (without CHN). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: CHN (+0.068).

Fragile: this link may not hold up.
  • correlation moves sharply once outliers are trimmed

Within each region

Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.

nr
Europe & Central Asia31-0.52

By income third

If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.

nr
Poorest third15-0.43
Middle third15-0.43
Richest third15-0.47

By largest religious group

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Christians36-0.17

Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = -0.168 after dropping 5 countries.

Two series, one country

Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.

Loading…

Over time, within countries

Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 14years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Within countries over time, there is no link that is clearly more than chance (r = +0.315, comparing each country only with itself over the years, and each year only with the same year elsewhere). Whatever the cross-country picture shows, countries whose civil liberties (fh) moved did not tend to see their redistribution move with it.

Across countries (adjusted)-0.345for comparison
Within countries+0.324each country vs itself
…and vs the same year elsewhere+0.315q = 0.280 · 39 countries
Year-on-year changes+0.116q = 0.457
Read with care.
  • Almost all of the second indicator's variation is between countries, so the within-country estimate rests on a small part of the data.

442 country-years (one country in one year), 39 countries, 2011–2024, about 11 years each on average. Share of the variation that happens within countries over time: 11% for Civil liberties (FH), 4% for Redistribution. The margins of error allow for each country appearing many times, and for each year’s value being close to the year before.

Year-to-year changes are a cautious test, not a final answer. Looking only at changes from one year to the next removes each country’s own trends. But it also makes measurement mistakes louder, which pulls the results toward zero. A near-zero result here is weak evidence of no link, not proof.

With one measure years behind the other

0.40−0.4-80+10years Redistribution trails Civil liberties (FH) →lag -8: r = -0.227 (n = 217)lag -7: r = -0.203 (n = 249)lag -6: r = -0.237 (n = 286)lag -5: r = -0.159 (n = 338)lag -4: r = -0.029 (n = 371)lag -3: r = 0.073 (n = 416)lag -2: r = 0.161 (n = 441)lag -1: r = 0.238 (n = 442)lag +0: r = 0.315 (n = 442)lag +1: r = 0.271 (n = 442)lag +2: r = 0.209 (n = 442)lag +3: r = 0.193 (n = 442)lag +4: r = 0.192 (n = 442)lag +5: r = 0.188 (n = 442)lag +6: r = 0.066 (n = 442)lag +7: r = 0.059 (n = 442)lag +8: r = -0.002 (n = 442)lag +9: r = -0.065 (n = 442)lag +10: r = -0.128 (n = 442)

Same year (lag 0): +0.315. A peak away from zero does not show which comes first. These series change slowly — this year’s value is close to last year’s. That makes the curve smooth and nearly symmetric, whatever produced the data. Even a sharp peak at one lag (a gap of some years) would not prove that one measure changes the other.

The data


rating (1-7, 1 = most free)
% reduction in the Gini		Years
Turkiye TUR618.6%2025, 2022
Russian Federation RUS627%2025, 2017
China CHN66.22%2025, 2011
Mexico MEX43.77%2025, 2022
India IND42.67%2025, 2011
Israel ISR323.2%2025, 2022
Hungary HUN329.4%2025, 2022
Brazil BRA313.8%2025, 2022
South Africa ZAF212.8%2025, 2017
United States USA222.1%2025, 2023
Romania ROU238.1%2025, 2023
Poland POL241.9%2025, 2023
Latvia LVA228.1%2025, 2023
Lithuania LTU229.7%2025, 2023
Korea, Rep. KOR218.2%2025, 2022

Freedom House, Freedom in the World
OECD databases as named on each indicator: PISA, Social Expenditure Database (SOCX), Income Distribution Database, Development Assistance Committee statistics, Family Database, Government at a Glance, Corporate Tax Statistics, employment and environment statistics

Sources

Civil liberties (FH)

Civil liberties rating

Freedom House · via Our World in Data · Free to use with attribution · updated annual

Scored 1 to 7, where 1 is most free. Covers freedom of speech and belief, the right to form groups, the rule of law and personal freedom. The same expert review process produces the political rights rating, so the two are bound to match closely.

Redistribution

Reduction in the Gini coefficient from taxes and transfers

OECD · via Our World in Data · CC BY 4.0 (OECD terms and conditions) · updated annual, except the snapshots noted per indicator · comparable from 2011 only

The Gini before taxes and payments minus the Gini after them, as a share of the first. It shows how much of the inequality produced by the market the government removes. It is built from the before-tax Gini above, so their pair is built from the same numbers and flagged. No "better" direction is set: a country may redistribute little because its market incomes are already equal.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2011–2025. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 7 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 12,497 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Civil liberties (FH) and Redistribution

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Civil liberties (FH) changes Redistribution, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Civil liberties (FH) or Redistribution