Certainly, at least in Europe and the United States, democracy is taken for granted. Not only is our political system democratic, our entire society is democratically organized. Our current understanding of democracy came about as a result of the emergence of the European nation-state. The functioning of modern democracy is consistent with the political system of the state. In the twentieth century the transforming processes of globalization, including the empowering of global institutions as well as technological revolution, influenced the role and functioning of the modern nation state. A new complexity and greater number of actors appeared on the world stage and the term ‘government’ was increasingly regarded as inappropriate in capturing political reality. The differentiated governance approach is more likely to be capable of dealing with complexity. But what are the effects on democracy?
This term paper argues that change from ‘government’ to ‘governance’ forces a change in the concept of democracy as well. To prove this assumption the European Union is closely examined.
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Theoretical Background
1.1 The Concept of Democracy
1.2 The Changing Nation-State
1.3 The New Governance
2. Democracy and the European Union
2.1 The Multi-level System of the EU
2.2 Applying Democracy to the EU
2.3 The Democratic Deficit in the European Union
2.4 A Question of Standard Setting?
2.5 Potential Remedies
3. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This term paper examines how the transition from traditional government to complex multi-level governance necessitates a fundamental reassessment of contemporary democratic theory, specifically through the case study of the European Union's democratic deficit.
- The evolution of democracy from the nation-state model.
- The impact of globalization on the traditional role of the nation-state.
- The shift from 'government' to 'governance' as a new political reality.
- An analysis of the democratic deficit within the institutional framework of the EU.
- Evaluation of potential remedies for democratic legitimacy in transnational organizations.
Excerpt from the Book
2.3 The Democratic Deficit in the European Union
Pro-integrationists see the deficit as existing mainly in the institutional framework. The decision-making process is not legitimized to a large enough extent by the parliament (Maurer 2002, 42). In the process of integration, competences of the national parliaments were delegated to the European Parliament without adjusting or strengthening the control structures (Maurer 2002, 21). Representatives of the institutional deficit see the solution as being in strengthening the European Parliament by inventing a full parliamentary democracy in the European Union.
Opponents of integration on the other hand do not see the strengthening the European Parliament as justified. As the EU suffers an enormous structural deficit due to its missing “people”, or demos, an institutional democratization of the EU does not seem legitimate (Maurer 2002, 51). Even though there is strong disagreement about its nature, Hix and Follesdale developed a generally accepted five-point standard-version of the democratic deficit (Hix/Follesdale 2005, 4ff). According to the first point of their model, the national parliaments have too little control. Additionally, the National parliaments are not in charge of an adequate personnel and do not possess sufficient organizational resources to control the EU decision making process (Maurer 2009, 22).
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides the theoretical motivation for the paper, establishing the shift from state-centric government to multi-level governance and defining the central inquiry into the EU's democratic deficit.
1. Theoretical Background: Outlines the historical development of the concept of democracy, the transformative pressures on the modern nation-state, and the rise of new governance approaches.
2. Democracy and the European Union: Investigates the EU's complex political structure, evaluates the application of traditional democratic standards to a supranational system, and reviews proposed remedies for identified democratic deficits.
3. Conclusion: Summarizes the finding that traditional democratic ideals are mismatched with the current multi-level governance reality and calls for a modern redesign of democratic theory.
Keywords
democracy, European Union, EU, globalization, governance, government, political system, nation-state, democratic deficit, multi-level system, institutional framework, legitimacy, supranational, political science, integration
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this paper?
The paper explores the democratic legitimacy of the European Union in light of the shift from traditional nation-state government to modern, multi-level governance structures.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The study covers democratic theory, the history of the nation-state, the organizational changes brought about by globalization, and the specific institutional challenges of the European Union.
What is the central research question?
The work investigates how the transition from government to governance influences the concept of democracy and asks whether standard democratic criteria are appropriate for a supranational body like the EU.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The paper utilizes a literature-based theoretical analysis, contrasting historical and institutional perspectives on democracy against the complex, evolving reality of European politics.
What is the focus of the main section?
The main section details the institutional structure of the EU, discusses the debate regarding its democratic deficit, and explores various academic suggestions for reform.
How are the key findings characterized?
The findings emphasize that current democratic ideals—predicated on the nation-state—cannot be seamlessly applied to the EU, suggesting a need for a new, more specific conceptual framework.
Why does the author argue that the nation-state model is no longer sufficient?
The author argues that globalization and technological shifts have created a complex reality where traditional government hierarchies are no longer capable of capturing political power dynamics.
What role do 'expert knowledge communities' play according to the text?
Referencing Zito, the paper mentions that expert groups could potentially help bridge the democratic gap by representing public interest and providing necessary expertise where citizen understanding is limited.
- Quote paper
- Michaela Böhme (Author), 2010, Why we need to renew democracy in Europe, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/210359
