Authors : Kamal Singh K. M.

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 12 - December

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4x7wwjsm

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/4sz8fzeu

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25dec269

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : This study examines how John Locke’s theory of limited government can be analytically evaluated using data-driven methods in contemporary governance systems. Locke argued that legitimate political authority rests upon the consent of the governed and that state power must remain limited to protect natural rights. While scholars have widely debated Locke’s normative political philosophy, few attempts have integrated computational tools, governance indicators, or data-analytics frameworks to test how Locke’s principles manifest in real governmental performance. Using secondary datasets such as World Governance Indicators (WGI), Worldwide Freedom Index, Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem), and e-Governance performance indicators, this study evaluates modern governance practices against Lockean benchmarks such as rule of law, accountability, limited coercive authority, and protection of individual rights. The findings show that countries with strong constraints on executive power, transparent regulatory systems, and participatory political mechanisms demonstrate outcomes consistent with Locke’s theory. The study concludes that combining political philosophy with empirical political data provides a scientifically grounded approach to test the relevance, applicability, and transformative power of classical political thought in present-day states.

Keywords : Locke; Limited Government; Social Contract; Data Analytics; Governance Indicators; Political Theory; Empirical Evaluation.

References :

1. Ackerman, B. (2000). The new separation of powers. Harvard University Press.
2. Bhattarai, K. (2019). Political pluralism and democratic governance. Journal of Nepalese Political Studies, 14(2), 45–68.
3. Chen, L., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Data analytics in political science: Emerging trends. International Journal of Data Science, 5(3), 112–128.
   Dahl, R. (1989). Democracy and its critics. Yale University Press.
4. Diamond, L. (2019). Democratic decline and authoritarian resurgence. Democratization, 26(2), 203–220.
5. Dunn, J. (2003). Locke: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
6. Freedom House. (2023). Freedom in the World Report. Freedom House.
7. Fukuyama, F. (2014). Political order and political decay. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
8. Grant, R. (1987). John Locke’s liberal constitutionalism. Political Theory, 15(4), 620–645.
9. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms. MIT Press.
10. International IDEA. (2020). Global state of democracy report. International IDEA.
11. Kim, S., & Park, Y. (2022). Computational approaches to democratic governance. Political Analytics Review, 9(1), 55–78.
12. Larsson, T. (2021). Digital governance and accountability. Governance Studies Quarterly, 12(2), 77–101.
13. Locke, J. (1689/1988). Two treatises of government. Cambridge University Press.
14. Macpherson, C. B. (1979). The life and times of liberal democracy. Oxford University Press.
15. Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (rev. ed.). Harvard University Press.
16. Sabl, A. (2012). Hume’s politics: Coordination and crisis in the history of England. Princeton University Press.
17. Saunders, B. (2016). Revisiting Locke’s social contract. Philosophical Inquiry, 38(3), 245–268.
18. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
19. Simmons, A. J. (1993). On the edge of anarchy: Locke, consent, and the limits of society.Princeton University Press.
20. Sreenivasan, G. (1995). The limits of Lockean rights. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 15(1), 123–145.
21. Transparency International. (2023). Corruption perceptions index. Transparency International.
22. Tuckness, A. (2010). Locke’s political philosophy and modern constitutionalism. Journal of Ethics and Politics, 12(1), 90–108.
23. United Nations. (2022). E-Government Development Index Report. UN Publications.
24. Wang, X., & Zhang, J. (2019). Predictive models in political governance research. Journal of Political Analytics, 7(1), 55–70.