The main purpose of this paper is to look at the democratic deficit from different perspectives and find out if the last treaty of the EU, the Lisbon Treaty, could bring the EU and its institutions closer towards democracy and eliminate or at least reduce the democratic deficit. In order to do so, first an attempt is made to define democratic deficit going to its roots and first implementation relating to the EU.
Second, different debates and opinions about the democratic deficit, its existence or absence will be presented in the second chapter of this seminar paper. Opinions of the most prominent scholars in this field such as Moravcsik, Majone and Hix, whose contribution to democratic discussions was enormous in the last decade will be thoroughly analyzed. The part involving opinions of Moravcsik and Majone of this chapter is the longest one based on an assumption that in our everyday life we often hear arguments in support of the existence of democratic deficit. It was important to show another perspective on this issue as not enough attention is drawn to assess democratic deficit from the point of its non-existence. Further opinions of scholars who agree with existence of democratic problems will be presented, whereas there will be many wanted correlations with Moravcsik and Majone to give a complete overview over the issue.
After defining and presenting different perspectives on democracy and democratic deficit I will continue talking about contributions made by the Lisbon Treaty to democracy as well as main reforms and opportunities for further development of the EU.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Democratic deficit and the two sides of a democratic coin
2.1 Defining “democratic deficit”
2.2 ‘Democratic deficit’ is a myth
2.2.1 Moravcsik
2.2.2 Majone
2.2. Existence of the democratic deficit and main problem areas
3. On the way to democracy: impacts of Lisbon Treaty
4. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Topics
The main objective of this paper is to analyze the concept of the "democratic deficit" within the European Union from multiple perspectives and to evaluate whether the Lisbon Treaty effectively addresses this issue or brings the EU closer to democratic legitimacy.
- Theoretical definitions and origins of the democratic deficit in the EU.
- Critical analysis of opposing views: the "myth" of the deficit vs. existence of systemic democratic problems.
- Assessment of the Lisbon Treaty's impact on EU institutional transparency and democratic participation.
- Investigation into the influence of the European Parliament and the role of national parliaments.
- Evaluation of the relationship between economic integration and political legitimacy.
Excerpt from the Book
1. Introduction
The EU structure and the way to reform or to improve it have been discussed by European politicians, political analysts and experts for many years. However the most criticized side of it is the lack of legitimacy, in other words ‘democratic deficit’ in its institutions. It is closely connected to the inflexibility of the EU bodies and weak control over the institutions by the citizens of the member states. Countless attempts were made to reduce this problem. However opinions about democratic deficit differ very strongly among the population of the EU as well as among politicians and experts. Some of them think that the definitions of democracy which exist in national states are applicable to such an entity as the EU. Others however think that the EU is an entity, which in its nature differs from every other entity which existed before. It is not a national state with a common history, common language, common way of thinking. It is also not an entity which includes many different states, which exist and act with full autonomy. The EU has far more influence on its members than any other entity existing. Therefore the question arises: can we apply the existing definitions of democracy on something completely new or do we have to create new definitions in order to solve the problem of the democratic deficit?
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Presents the central problem of legitimacy in EU institutions and outlines the research objective concerning the impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the democratic deficit.
2. Democratic deficit and the two sides of a democratic coin: Examines competing scholarly perspectives, contrasting the view that the democratic deficit is a myth with the argument that significant democratic structural problems persist.
3. On the way to democracy: impacts of Lisbon Treaty: Analyzes the specific reforms introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, focusing on their potential to enhance parliamentary power and citizen involvement in EU policy-making.
4. Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, arguing that the EU requires new definitions of democracy and continuous efforts toward politicization to overcome the distance between institutions and citizens.
Keywords
European Union, democratic deficit, Lisbon Treaty, legitimacy, European Parliament, European integration, Moravcsik, Majone, Follesdal, Hix, political accountability, institutional reform, subsidiarity, citizens' initiative, democratic legitimacy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this seminar paper?
The paper explores the concept of the "democratic deficit" within the European Union, investigating its existence and evaluating whether the Lisbon Treaty provides necessary reforms to enhance the democratic nature of the union.
What are the central thematic fields covered?
The core themes include theories of EU democracy, the debate between political scholars regarding the legitimacy of EU institutions, the legislative processes of the EU, and the impact of successive treaties on political accountability.
What is the core research question?
The research asks if the existing definitions of democracy from national states are applicable to the EU and whether the Lisbon Treaty has effectively reduced the democratic deficit or brought the institutions closer to the citizens.
What methodology is employed to study the democratic deficit?
The author employs a qualitative analysis of existing debates, thoroughly analyzing contributions from prominent scholars such as Moravcsik, Majone, Follesdal, and Hix to assess conflicting perspectives on EU democratic legitimacy.
What subjects are addressed in the main body?
The main body covers definitions of the democratic deficit, the scholarly arguments labeling it a "myth" based on functionalism, the counter-arguments highlighting institutional weaknesses, and the specific legal adjustments brought by the Lisbon Treaty.
Which keywords best characterize the work?
Key terms include European Union, democratic deficit, Lisbon Treaty, institutional legitimacy, European Parliament, and political integration.
How does the author characterize the "myth" perspective?
The author outlines the perspective of scholars like Moravcsik, who argue that the EU should not be compared to a utopian democratic state, but rather viewed as a functional regulatory system with sufficient indirect democratic control.
What is the role of the "Community Method" mentioned in the text?
The Community Method is described as a prioritisation of European integration over democratic processes, which according to several scholars, has contributed to the increase in executive power at the expense of national and European parliaments.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Sabina Agarunova (Autor:in), 2014, Could the Lisbon Treaty bring the EU and its institutions closer towards democracy and reduce the democratic deficit?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/317763
