P R E L I M I N A R Y R E P O R T

106NOTES1. That work can be found in the annual EconomicFreedom of the World reports co-authored by JamesGwartney, Robert Lawson, and Joshua Hall (Vancouver:Fraser Institute). See also Joshua Halland Robert Lawson, “Economic Freedom of theWorld: An Accounting of the Literature,” ContemporaryEconomic Policy, March 2013.2. Some of those preliminary papers can be foundin Fred McMahon, ed., Toward a Worldwide Index ofHuman Freedom (Vancouver: Fraser Institute, 2012).3. John Locke, 1691/1960, Two Treatises of Government:The Second Treatise: Liberty Fund, at OnlineLibrary of Liberty, http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/222#Locke_0057_71.4. See George H. Smith, The System of Liberty:Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism (NewYork: Cambridge University Press, 2013), especiallychapter 7 (pp. 133–151), on “The Idea of Freedom”and Tom G. Palmer, Realizing Freedom: LibertarianTheory, History, and Practice (Washington:Cato Institute, 2009).5. Isaiah Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty,” inBerlin, Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: ClarendonPress, 1969). The justification for relying onthe concept of negative freedom, is discussed atlength in Fred McMahon, “Human Freedom fromPericles to Measurement” in Fred McMahon, ed.,Towards a Worldwide Index of Human Freedom (Vancouver:Fraser Institute, 2012).6. See McMahon and Palmer, especially chapter2 (pp. 13–32), “Freedom Properly Understood,” inwhich he critiques Amartya Sen’s capability approachto defining freedom. See also Jean-PierreChauffour, The Power of Freedom: Uniting HumanRights and Development (Washington: Cato Institute,2009).7. McMahon, Toward a Worldwide Index, p. 3.8. Democracy, as is widely believed, may be moreconsistent than other forms of government atsafeguarding freedom, but many philosophers offreedom, such as Berlin, draw a distinction betweenfreedom and democracy. See Berlin.9. James Gwartney, Robert Lawson, and WalterBlock, Economic Freedom of the World: 1975–1995(Vancouver: Fraser Institute, 1996), p. 12.10. See McMahon, Toward a Worldwide Index.11. Friedrich Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 137.12. Note that the latest two EFW reports cover152 countries. Because that report measures datafrom 2011 and 2012, it excludes Syria, as the civilwar that began in 2011 has made data from thatcountry unreliable. For that reason, our index includesSyria prior to 2011, but not since then.13. Locke, 1691/1960, ch. VI, 241-2, para 57.14. Hayek, p. 154.15. Mark Agrast et al., WJP Rule of Law Index2012–2013 (Washington: The World Justice Project,2012) and WJP Rule of Law Index 2014 (Washington:The World Justice Project, 2014). Thissource provides data for 94 countries in our indexfor the year 2011 and for 95 countries for the year2012. To derive rule-of-law ratings for the remainingcountries in our index, we regressed the WJPrule of law measures we constructed with the ruleof law measures from the World Bank’s GovernanceIndicators (which produced a correlationcoefficient of 0.93 using the 2012 WJP reportand 0.95 using the 2014 WJP report). Note alsothat the ratings from the 2012–2013 WJP reportreflect data collected in late 2009, 2011 and early2012. That is the data we use in our index for 2010.Because previous WJP indexes are not comparableto the 2012 WJP report and cover fewer countries,we also use the same data in our 2008 indexfollowing a carry-over rule of not more than fiveyears in the case of missing data. For data for theyear 2012, we rely on the 2014 WJP report.16. For the exact survey questions the WJP usedto derive these measures see Appendix A in Juan