Summary of Findings
Navigate this page:
A rising tide
of restrictions on religion spread across the world between mid-2009 and
mid-2010, according to a new study by the Pew Research Center’s Forum
on
Religion & Public Life. Restrictions on religion rose in each
of the five major regions of the world – including in the Americas and
sub-Saharan Africa, the two regions where overall restrictions previously had
been declining.
The share of countries with high or very high restrictions on
religious beliefs and practices rose from 31% in the year ending in mid-2009 to
37% in the year ending in mid-2010. Because some of the most restrictive
countries are very populous, three-quarters of the world’s approximately 7
billion people live in countries with high government restrictions on religion
or high social hostilities involving religion, up from 70% a year earlier.
Restrictions on religion rose not only in countries that
began the year with high or very high restrictions or hostilities, such as
Indonesia and Nigeria, but also in many countries that began with low or
moderate restrictions or hostilities, such as Switzerland and the United
States. (See sidebar on the U.S..)
The rising tide
of restrictions in the latest year studied is attributable to a variety of
factors, including increases in crimes, malicious acts and violence motivated
by religious hatred or bias, as well as increased government interference with
worship or other religious practices. For instance, a November 2009
constitutional referendum in Switzerland banned the
construction of minarets on mosques in the
country. In Indonesia, more than two dozen churches were forced to close due to pressure from Islamist extremists or, in some instances, local officials. And in Nigeria, violence between
Christian and Muslim communities, including a series of deadly attacks,
escalated throughout the period.
During the latest year covered in the
study, there also was an increase in harassment or intimidation of particular
religious groups. Indeed, five of the seven major religious groups monitored by
the study – Jews, Christians, Buddhists, adherents of folk or traditional
religions, and members of other world religions – experienced four-year highs
in the number of countries in which they were harassed by national, provincial
or local governments, or by individuals or groups in society (for details, see
Harassment of Specific Groups).
This is the third time the Pew Forum has measured
restrictions on religion around the globe. The new study scores 197 countries
and territories on the same two indexes used in the previous studies: 1
- The
Government Restrictions Index (GRI) measures government laws, policies and
actions that restrict religious beliefs or practices. The GRI is comprised of
20 measures of restrictions, including efforts by governments to ban particular
faiths, prohibit conversions, limit preaching or give preferential treatment to
one or more religious groups.
- The Social Hostilities Index (SHI)
measures acts of religious hostility by private individuals, organizations and
social groups. This includes mob or sectarian violence, harassment over attire
for religious reasons and other religion-related intimidation or abuse. The SHI
includes 13 measures of social hostilities.
Over the four years studied, the number
of countries with very high government restrictions on religion rose from 10 as
of mid-2007 to 18 as of mid-2010, as a total of 10 countries (Afghanistan,
Algeria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Indonesia, Maldives, Russia, Syria, Tunisia and
Yemen) were added to the “very high” category, while just two (Brunei and
Turkey) were removed (see table on page 10). Meanwhile, 94 countries (48%) had
low levels of government restrictions as of mid-2010, down from 117 (59%) in
the first year of the study. (For a complete list of all countries in each
category, see the Government Restrictions Index table PDF .)
The number of countries with very high
social hostilities also rose, from 10 as of mid-2007 to 15 as of mid-2010, as
five countries (Egypt, Nigeria, the Palestinian territories, Russia and Yemen)
were added to the “very high” category and none were removed (see table above).
Meanwhile, half of the 197 countries in the study (98) had low levels of social
hostilities in mid-2010, down from 114 in mid-2007. (For a complete list of all
countries in each category, see the Social Hostilities Index table PDF.)
Changes in Government Restrictions
In addition to scoring countries on both indexes, the study
looks at the extent and direction of change within each country from the year
ending in mid-2009 to the year ending in mid-2010.
Just six countries (3%) had large changes (2.0 points or
more) in their scores on the 10-point Government Restrictions Index, and all
six (Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Fiji, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka and
Tunisia) were in the direction of higher restrictions. Among countries with
modest changes (1.0 to 1.9 points), there were many more increases (30) than
decreases (13). And the same was true among countries with small changes (less
than 1.0 point): 88 had increases, while 37 had decreases.
Considering all changes, regardless of
magnitude, 63% of countries had increases in government restrictions from
mid-2009 to mid-2010, while 25% had decreases. The level of increase in
government restrictions during the latest year studied exceeds the increase
over the previous three years, when 56% of countries had increases and 31% had
decreases.
Changes in Social Hostilities
Increases in social hostilities
involving religion also outnumbered decreases in each point range. Among the
countries whose scores went up or down by 2.0 points or more on the 10-point
Social Hostilities Index, four times as many had increases in hostilities (17)
as had decreases (four).2 Twenty-five countries had increases of
between 1.0 and 1.9 points in their SHI scores, while just 15 had decreases in
that range. And 55 countries had increases of less than 1.0 point, while 44 had
decreases of that size.
Considering changes of any magnitude,
49% of countries had increases in hostilities from mid-2009 to mid-2010, while
32% had decreases. During the three previous years, by contrast, 44% of
countries had increases in hostilities and 39% had decreases.
Changes in Overall Restrictions
Considering government restrictions
and social hostilities together, increases outnumbered decreases in each point
range from mid-2009 to mid-2010. Among countries whose scores went up or down
by 2.0 points or more on either of the indexes after taking
into account any offsetting change on the other index, six times as many
countries had increases (18) as decreases (three).3
Overall, restrictions increased at
least somewhat in 66% of countries and decreased in 28% between mid-2009 and
mid-2010. As was the case when the two indexes were considered separately, this
exceeds the increase during the preceding three years, when 56% of countries
had increases and 39% had decreases.
Sidebar: Situation in the United States
The United States was among the 16 countries whose scores on both the Government
Restrictions Index and the Social Hostilities Index increased by one point or more in the year
ending in mid-2010. This was the first time scores for the U.S. increased on both indexes
during the four-year period covered in this study.
Read More...
Patterns among Specific Types of
Restrictions and Hostilities
As noted in previous Pew Forum
studies on religious restrictions, higher scores on the Government Restrictions
Index are associated with higher scores on the Social Hostilities Index and
vice versa. This means that, in general, it is rare for countries that score
high on one index to be low on the other.
The new study finds that some
government restrictions have a stronger association with social hostilities
than others. Government policies or actions that clearly favor one religion
over others have the strongest association with social hostilities involving
religion. The average level of social hostilities among the countries with very
high levels of government favoritism (SHI = 4.8) is much higher than the
average level of social hostilities among countries with low levels of
government favoritism (1.3), as shown in the chart on page 20. Other government
actions that are strongly associated with social hostilities involving religion
are (in descending order): the use of force against religious groups; failing
to intervene to stop religious discrimination; and limiting conversion from one
religion to another.4
As the chart below shows, social
hostilities involving religion were lowest among countries where governments do
not harass or intimidate religious groups; national laws and policies protect
religious freedom; governments do not interfere with religious worship or
practices; and governments do not use force against religious groups.
Likewise, certain types of social
hostilities involving religion are more likely to be associated with higher
government restrictions on religion. Sectarian or communal violence between religious
groups has the strongest association with government restrictions on religion.
The average level of government restrictions among the countries with sectarian
violence (GRI = 5.0) is much higher than among countries without such violence
(2.4), as shown in the chart on page 21. Other social hostilities that are
strongly associated with government restrictions are (in descending order):
hostilities over conversion from one religion to another; violence or the
threat of violence to enforce religious norms; religion-related terrorist
violence; and groups coercively dominating public life with their perspective
on religion.5
As shown in the chart below,
government restrictions are, on average, lowest in countries where there are no
violent acts resulting from tensions between religious groups; there are no
crimes or malicious acts motivated by religious hatred; there are no groups
dominating public life with their perspective on religion; and there are no
incidents of violence stemming from hostility over conversions.
Harassment of Specific Groups
The Government
Restrictions Index and Social Hostilities Index each include a question about
the harassment of specific religious groups (GRI Q.11 and SHI Q.1a). Harassment
and intimidation by governments or social groups take many forms, including
physical assaults, arrests and detentions, the desecration of holy sites and
discrimination against religious groups in employment, education and housing.
Harassment and intimidation also include such things as verbal assaults on
members of one religious group by other groups or individuals.
The number of
countries where harassment or intimidation of specific religious groups took
place rose from 147 as of mid-2009 to 160 as of mid-2010. Moreover, five of the
seven major religious groups included in this study – Christians, Jews,
Buddhists, adherents of folk or traditional religions, and members of other
world religions – experienced four-year highs with respect to the number of
countries in which they were harassed by some level of government or by
individuals or groups in society.
In the year ending in mid-2010,
government or social harassment of Christians was reported in 111 countries;
the previous high was 107 countries in the first year of the study. Government
or social harassment of Jews was reported in 68 countries in the year ending in
mid-2010, a figure that had been steadily rising across all four years of the
study. Incidents of harassment involving members of other world religions –
including Sikhs, ancient faiths such as Zoroastrianism, and newer faiths such
as Baha’is and Rastafarians – occurred in 52 countries in the year ending in
mid-2010, up from 39 countries the previous year. Members of groups that
practice folk or traditional religions (including African traditional
religions, Chinese folk religions, Native American religions and Australian
aboriginal religions) faced harassment in 26 countries, compared with 24 in the
previous year. Buddhists were harassed in 15 countries in the latest year studied;
although this is far fewer than most other major religious groups, it
represents a four-year high for this group. In the latest year of the study,
Muslims were harassed in 90 countries and Hindus faced harassment in 16
countries – also more countries than in the previous year, though not four-year
highs.
Overall, across the four years of
this study, religious groups were harassed in a total of 184 countries at one
time or another. Adherents of the
world’s two largest religious groups, Christians and Muslims – who together
comprise more than half of the global population – were harassed in the largest
number of countries.6 Jews, who
comprise less than 1% of the world’s population, experienced harassment in a
total of 85 countries, while members of other world faiths were harassed in a
total of 72 countries.
Some religious groups were more
likely to be harassed by governments, while others were more likely to be
harassed by individuals or groups in society. Christians, for example, were
harassed by government officials or organizations in 95 countries in the year
ending in mid-2010 and by social groups or individuals in 77 countries. Muslims
also were more likely to be harassed by governments (74 countries) than by
social groups or individuals (64 countries). Jews, by contrast, experienced
social harassment in many more countries (64) than they faced government
harassment (21).
Regions and Countries
Government
restrictions on religion and/or social hostilities involving religion increased
in each of the five major regions of the world between mid-2009 and mid-2010.
In three regions – Europe, the Middle East-North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa
– the median level of restrictions and hostilities both increased. In the
Americas, the median level of government restrictions increased, while in the
Asia-Pacific region, the median level of social hostilities increased.
Looking at the
extent and direction of change on the Government Restrictions Index and the
Social Hostilities Index together, increases of one point or more outnumbered
decreases of that magnitude in all five regions, as shown in the chart on page
25. Sub-Saharan Africa had the largest share of countries with increases of one
point or more (36%). Europe and the Americas had the lowest proportion of
countries where overall restrictions increased by one point or more (22% and
23%, respectively).
Government Restrictions by Region
The median level
of government restrictions on religion increased in four of the five regions
demarcated in this study (the Middle East and North Africa, Europe, sub-Saharan
Africa and the Americas); it stayed roughly the same in the Asia-Pacific
region.
In the latest
year studied, government restrictions were highest in the Middle East and North
Africa. The median score on the Government Restrictions Index for the 20
countries in the region (5.8 as of mid-2010) was up from the previous year
(5.2).
As of mid-2010,
government restrictions on religion were high or very high in most of the
countries that experienced the political uprisings known as the Arab Spring in
late 2010 and early 2011. In Tunisia – where the uprisings began – government
restrictions increased from the high category as of mid-2009 to the very high
category as of mid-2010 (an increase of more than two points). In Egypt – where
the violence spread shortly after – government restrictions already were in the
very high category; still, the country’s score on the Government Restrictions
Index edged slightly higher, from 8.6 in mid-2009 to 8.7 in mid-2010. And in
Yemen – where violence erupted almost simultaneously with the uprising in Egypt
– government restrictions on religion rose from the high category (6.4) as of
mid-2009 to the very high category (7.0) as of mid-2010.
The 50 countries
in the Asia-Pacific region had a median GRI score in the middle range (3.4) as
of mid-2010, the same as the previous year. However, half of the 18 countries
worldwide with very high government restrictions on religion are located in the
region: Indonesia, Maldives, Afghanistan, Iran, Uzbekistan, China, Burma
(Myanmar), Vietnam and Azerbaijan.
Median scores on
the Government Restrictions Index for countries in Europe, sub-Saharan Africa
and the Americas rose slightly from mid-2009 to mid-2010. Although the median
level of government restrictions in the Americas was relatively low (1.2 as of
mid-2010), one country, Cuba, had high restrictions. Eight other countries in
the region, including the United States, were in the moderate category. (See
sidebar on the Situation in the United States.)
Social Hostilities by Region
The median level of social
hostilities involving religion also increased in four of the five regions (the
Middle East and North Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and sub-Saharan Africa);
it stayed roughly the same in the Americas.
As with government restrictions,
social hostilities involving religion were highest in the Middle East and North
Africa. However, the region’s median score on the Social Hostilities Index rose
only slightly, from 4.2 as of mid-2009 to 4.3 as of mid-2010.
The median level of social
hostilities in the Americas remained low, unchanged from mid-2009 to mid-2010.
Only one of the 35 countries in the region – Mexico – had high social
hostilities, and 29 (83%) had low hostilities. Five countries in the region
(United States, Brazil, Colombia, Haiti and Chile) were in the moderate
category; however, all but one of these countries, Colombia, had increases of
one point or more on the Social Hostilities Index. Columbia’s score decreased
by 0.2. (See sidebar on the Situation in the United States.)
Restrictions and Hostilities in the
Most Populous Countries
Among the world’s 25 most populous
countries, Egypt, Indonesia, Russia, Burma (Myanmar), Iran, Vietnam, Pakistan,
India, Bangladesh and Nigeria stand out as having the most restrictions on
religion as of mid-2010 when government restrictions and social hostilities
both are taken into account. Brazil, Japan, Italy, the United States and the
Democratic Republic of the Congo have the least restrictions and hostilities.
None of the 25 most populous countries
had low social hostilities involving religion as of mid-2010, while four had
low government restrictions on religion: South Africa, Brazil, Philippines and
Japan. As discussed in the sidebar on page 15, the United States moved from the
low category of government restrictions in mid-2009 to the moderate category in
2010, based on the information in the sources consulted for this study.
Government
restrictions and/or social hostilities increased by one point or more in
several European countries from mid-2009 to mid-2010, including Russia, the
United Kingdom, Germany and France. (See Government Restrictions Index table PDF on and Social Hostilities Index table PDF.) Russia moved from the high category of social
hostilities in mid-2009 to the very high category in mid-2010, primarily
because of increasing tensions in heavily Muslim areas. Russia already had very
high government restrictions. Indeed, Russia was the only European country with
very high scores on both the Government Restrictions Index and the Social
Hostilities Index in the latest year studied. (To compare scores for each of
the 25 most populous countries in all four years covered in this study, see the interactive feature below.)
Embed Code:
About the Study
These are among the key findings of the Pew Forum’s new
report on global restrictions on religion. The 197 countries and
self-administering territories covered by the study contain more than 99.5% of
the world’s population. They include 191 of the 192 member states of the United
Nations as of mid-2010 plus six self-administering territories — Kosovo, Hong
Kong, Macau, the Palestinian territories, Taiwan and Western Sahara.7 Each country
or territory was scored on a total of 33 measures phrased as questions about
government restrictions or social hostilities involving religion. (For the full
question wording, see the Summary of Results.) The Government
Restrictions Index is comprised of 20 questions; there are 13 questions on the
Social Hostilities Index.
To answer the questions that make up the indexes, Pew Forum
researchers combed through 19 widely cited, publicly available sources of
information, including reports by the U.S. State Department, the U.S.
Commission on International Religious Freedom, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on
Freedom of Religion or Belief, the Council of the European Union, the United
Kingdom’s Foreign & Commonwealth Office, Human Rights Watch, the
International Crisis Group, Freedom House and Amnesty International. (For the
complete list of sources, see the Methodology.)
The researchers involved in this
process recorded only concrete reports about specific government laws, policies
and actions, as well as specific incidents of religious violence or intolerance
by social groups; they did not rely on the commentaries or opinions of the
sources. (For a more detailed explanation of the coding and data verification
procedures, see the Methodology.) The goal was to devise a battery of
quantifiable, objective measures that could be analyzed individually as well as
combined into two comprehensive indexes, the Government Restrictions Index and
the Social Hostilities Index.
Some of the increases in religious
restrictions noted in this study could reflect the use of more up-to-date or
better information sources, but there is no evidence of a general informational
bias in the direction of higher restrictions. For instance, the social
hostilities sections of the U.S. State Department’s annual reports on
International Religious Freedom (one of the 19 primary sources used in this
study) in general have gotten shorter in more recent years. Pew Forum staff
carefully monitor the impact of source information variability each year. (See
the Methodology for more details.)
Readers should note that the categories
of very high, high, moderate and low restrictions or hostilities are relative –
not absolute – rankings based on the overall distribution of index scores in
the initial year of this study. As such, they provide a guide for comparing
country scores and evaluating their direction of change over time. They also
reflect the number and severity of different restrictions or hostilities that
occurred in a given year in any part of the country. Accordingly, more populous
countries may have a higher likelihood of scoring higher than less populous
countries, though in practice, some countries with very high levels of
restrictions or hostilities have relatively small populations, such as the
Maldives and the Palestinian territories.
Finally, although it is very likely
that more restrictions exist than are reported by the 19 primary sources, taken
together the sources are sufficiently comprehensive to provide a good estimate
of the levels of restrictions in almost all countries. The one major exception
is North Korea. The sources clearly indicate that North Korea’s government is
among the most repressive in the world with respect to religion as well as
other civil and political liberties. (The U.S. State Department’s 2010 Report
on International Religious Freedom, for example, says that “Genuine freedom of
religion does not exist” in North Korea.) But because North Korean society is
effectively closed to outsiders and independent observers lack regular access
to the country, the sources were unable to provide the kind of specific, timely
information that the Pew Forum categorized and counted (“coded,” in social
science parlance) for this quantitative study. Therefore, the report does not
include scores for North Korea.
Footnotes:
1 Previous reports provided a score for
the territory of Northern Cyprus and therefore included 198 countries and
territories. According to the U.S. State Department, only one country – Turkey
– recognizes the separate status of Northern Cyprus. Thus, future reports will
score Northern Cyprus as part of the Republic of Cyprus. The exclusion of
Northern Cyprus in this report has a negligible effect on the global and
regional findings. In addition, a single index score was recorded for all of
Sudan for this report because South Sudan remained a part of Sudan until July
2011, which is after the period studied in this report. (Return to text)
2 The 17 countries that had increases
of 2.0 points or more were: Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Cyprus,
France, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, New Zealand,
South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Uganda and the United Kingdom. The four
countries that had decreases of 2.0 points or more were Comoros, Denmark,
Slovakia and Western Sahara. (Return to text)
3 The 18 countries that had an increase
of 2.0 points or more were: Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cyprus, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya,
Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, New Zealand, Nicaragua, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tanzania,
Tunisia, Uganda and the United Kingdom. The three countries that had decreases
of 2.0 points or more were Comoros, Denmark and Slovakia. (Return to text)
4 Ordering is based on second decimal
places when scores are tied. (Return to text)
5 Ordering is based on second decimal
places when scores are tied. (Return to text)
6 For estimates of the size of the
global Christian population, see the Pew Forum’s 2011 report, “Global
Christianity: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Christian
Population.” For estimates of the size of the global Muslim population, see the
Pew Forum’s 2011 report, “The Future of the Global Muslim Population.” (Return to text)
7 As previously noted, this report does
not include scores for the territory of Northern Cyprus or North Korea. (Return to text)