Methodology | Pew Research Center
A new analysis from the Pew Research Center indicates that a rising number of countries experienced elevated levels of social hostilities involving religion during the 2023 calendar year. The study, which marks the 16th time the organization has measured global religious restrictions, utilizes two 10-point indexes—the Government Restrictions Index (GRI) and the Social Hostilities Index (SHI)—to track data across 198 countries and self-governing territories.
How Religious Restrictions Are Measured
The research evaluates restrictions by comparing annual index scores based on 20 indicators for government actions and 13 indicators for societal hostilities. According to the methodology, countries are assigned to categories based on the magnitude of change in their scores, ranging from “no change” to shifts of 2 points or more. Researchers utilize a baseline from mid-2007 to classify countries into “very high,” “high,” “moderate,” or “low” restriction tiers based on percentile rankings.

What Happens Next
As the Pew Research Center continues to monitor these metrics, analysts expect that the integration of diverse data sources will remain critical to identifying long-term trends. Future reports may adjust for evolving geopolitical realities, such as the de facto control of disputed territories, which currently affects how Russia and the Palestinian territories are coded. Because the study relies on documented incidents, significant changes in global conflict patterns or government transparency are likely to directly influence future index scores.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between the GRI and the SHI?
The Government Restrictions Index (GRI) measures laws, policies, and actions by officials that limit religious practice, while the Social Hostilities Index (SHI) tracks violence, intimidation, and pressure exerted by private individuals, organizations, or social groups.

Why is North Korea excluded from the study?
North Korea is not included on either index because independent observers lack the regular access necessary to provide the specific, timely information required for the study’s coding process.
How does the study handle disputed territories?
The research codes actions based on de facto control. For instance, the report considers policies of the Moroccan government when assessing religion in Western Sahara and includes restrictions occurring in Russian-invaded regions under Russia’s GRI score to reflect current administrative control.
How do you think increased access to information in different regions might change our perception of global religious freedom?