Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Democracy and European Union Governance

  • Chapter
Research Agendas in EU Studies

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

Abstract

If one were to set the date of birth for the EU’s often acclaimed ‘democratic deficit’, 9 May 1950 should be considered a hot candidate. Once Robert Schuman’s plan to create the ECSC was in the open, the prospective member states and their officials puzzled over the implications of this plan not only for their economic and security-related concerns but also for the democratic legitimacy of policy-making in the context of the new supranational political order. The proposal to institute a supranational High Authority was considered highly problematic in this regard: while the Dutch and Benelux officials saw the looming threat of a ‘dictatorship of experts’ that needed to be put firmly under (inter-) governmental control (Küsters, 1988: 79), the German officials at the Schuman Plan conference saw in the High Authority a quasi-executive that had to be democratically controlled by a supranational parliament. Concerns about democratic accountability and interest representation have been regular characteristics of EU politics since the inception of the ECSC; over time, the institutional features of representative democracy have thus been gradually transplanted onto the EU level (Rittberger and Schimmelfennig, 2007).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Arrow, K. J. (1951) Social Choice and Individual Values (New Haven: Yale University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartolini, S. (2005) Reconstructing Europe. Centre Formation, System Building, and Political Structuring between the Nation State and the European Union (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bartolini, S. (2006) ‘Should the Union be “Politicized”? Prospects and Risks’, Policy Paper 19, Paris: Notre Europe: 29–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bee, C, Scartezzini, R. and Scott, A. (2008) ‘The Development of a European Public Sphere: A Stalled Project?’, European Political Science 7(3): 257–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cederman, L.-E. (2001) ‘Political Boundaries and Identity Trade-Offs’, in L.-E. Cederman (ed.) Constructing Europe’s Identity. The External Dimension (London: Lynne Rienner Publishers) 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtin, D. (2003) ‘Private Interest Representation or Civil Interest Deliberation? A Contemporary Dilemma for European Union Governance’, Social Legal Studies 12(1): 55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. (1989) Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • De Schutter, O. (2002) ‘Europe in Search of its Civil Society’, European Law Journal 8(2): 198–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. (2007) ‘Theory, Evidence, and the Tasks of Deliberation’, in S. W. Rosenberg (ed.) Deliberation, Participation and Democracy. Can the People Govern? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan) 237–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eijk, C. van der and Franklin, M. N. (2004) ‘Potential for contestation on European matters at national elections in Europe’, in G. Marks and M. R. Steenbergen (eds) European Integration and Political Conflict (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, E. O. (ed.) (2005) Making the European Polity. Reflexive Integration in the EU (London: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, E. O. (ed.) (2006) ‘Deliberation and the problem of democratic legitimacy in the EU. Are working agreements the most that can be expected?’ ARENA Working Paper No. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, E. O. (ed.) (2007) ‘A Comment on Schmalz-Bruns’, in B. Kohler-Koch and B. Rittberger (eds) Debating the democratic Legitimacy of the European Union (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield): 304–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, E. O. and Fossum, J. E. (2000) ‘Post-national integration’, in Ebd. (eds), Democracy in the European Union. Integration through Deliberation? (London: Routledge) 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, E. O. and Fossum, J. E. (2007) Europe in Transformation. How to Reconstitute Democracy? Recon Online Working Paper 01.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. (2007) ‘The Community Deficit’, Journal of Common Market Studies 45(1): 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2001) ‘European Governance, A White Paper.’ 428 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, H. and Héritier A. (2007) ‘Contested competences in Europe: Incomplete contracts and interstitial institutional change’, West European Politics 30(2): 227–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finke, B. (2007) ‘Civil society participation in EU governance’, Living Reviews in European Governance 2(2): 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Follesdal, A. and Hix S. (2006) ‘Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik’, Journal of Common Market Studies 44(3): 533–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fossum, J. E. and Eriksen, E. O. (2003) ‘Europe in search of its legitimacy. Assessing strategies of legitimation’, in E. O. Eriksen, C. Joerges and J. Neyer (eds) European Governance, Deliberation and the Quest for Démocratisation (Oslo: Arena Report) 23–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. (2003) ‘Associations and Democracy: Between Theories, Hopes, and Realities’, Annuals Review of Sociology 29: 515–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, K. H. and Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. (2008) ‘The Europeanisation of National Political Systems: Parliaments and Executives’, Living Reviews in European Governance 3(2): 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greven, M. T. (2007) ‘Some Consideration on Participation in Participatory Governance’, in B. Kohler-Koch and B. Rittberger (eds) Debating the democratic legitimacy of the European Union (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers) 233–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, D. (2001) Die Verfassung und die Politik. Einsprüche in Störfällen (München: CH. Beck).

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1994) ‘Three Normative Models of Democracy’, Constellations 1(1): 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1996) Between Pacts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy (Cambridge MA: MIT Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2001) ‘Why Europe needs a Constitution’, New Left Review 11: 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D. (1996) Models of Democracy (Cambridge: Polity Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Héritier, A. (2007) Explaining Institutional Change in Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S. (2002) ‘Constitutional Agenda-Setting through Discretion in Rule Interpretation: Why the European Parliament Won at Amsterdam’, British Journal of Political Science 32(2): 259–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S. (2006) ‘Why the EU needs (Left-Right) politics? Policy reform and accountability are impossible without it’, Policy Paper No. 19, Paris: Notre Europe: 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S., Raunio, T. and Scully, R. (2003) ‘Fifty Years on: Research on the European Parliament’, Journal of Common Market Studies 41(2): 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S., Noury, A. G. and Roland, G. (2007) Democratic Politics in the European Parliament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hobolt, S. B. (2006) ‘Direct Democracy and European Integration’, Journal of European Public Policy 13(1): 153–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joerges, C, Mény, Y. and Weiler, J. H. H. (2001) Mountain or Molehill? A Critical Appraisal of the Commission White Paper on Governance, New York School of Law, Jean Monnet Working Paper Series 6(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kielmansegg, P. G. (2003) ‘Integration und Demokratie’, in M. Jachtenfuchs and B. Kohler-Koch (eds), Europäische Integration (Opladen: Leske and Budrich).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohler-Koch, B. and Finke, B. (2007) ‘The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations: A Contribution to Democracy via Participation?’ Journal of Civil Society 3(3): 205–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohler-Koch, B. and Rittberger, B. (2007) ‘Charting Crowded Territory: Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union’, in B. KohlerKoch and B. Rittberger (eds) Debating the democratic Legitimacy of the European Union (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield) 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Küsters, H. J. (1988) ‘Die Verhandlungen über das institutionelle System zur Gründung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft für Kohl and Stahl’, in K. Schwabe (ed.) Die Anfänge des Schuman Plans 1950/51 — The Beginnings of the Schuman Plan (Baden-Baden: Nomos).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kymlicka, W. (1993) ‘Community’, in R. E. Gooding and P. Petit (eds), A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy (Maiden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd) 366–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepsius, R. M. (1999) ‘Bildet sich eine Kulturelle Identität innerhalb der Europäischen Gemeinschaft?’, in W. Reese-Schäfer, Identität und Interesse: Der Diskurs der Identitätsforschung (Opladen: Leske and Budrich).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindner, J. and Rittberger, B. (2003) ‘The Creation, Interpretation and Contestation of Institutions—Revisiting Historical Institutionalism’, Journal of Common Market Studies 41(3): 445–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnette, P. and Papadopoulos, Y. (2008) ‘On the Politicisation of the European Consociation: A Middle Way Between Hix and Bartolini’, European Governance Papers (Eurogov), C-08–01.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, J. and Rittberger, B. (2008) ‘Shifting Europe’s Boundaries: Mass Media, Public Opinion and the Enlargement of the EU’, European Union Politics 9(2): 243–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, P. (2007) ‘Political Opposition and the European Union’, Government and Opposition 42(1): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (2000) ‘The Credibility Crisis of Community Regulation’, Journal of Common Market Studies 38(2): 273–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (2002) ‘Delegation of Regulatory Power in a Mixed Polity’, European Law Journal 38(3): 319–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (2006) ‘The common sense of European Integration’, Journal of European Public Policy 13(5): 607–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milward, A. S. (1992) The European Rescue of the Nation-State (London: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (1994) ‘Why the European Community Strengthens the State: Domestic Politics and International Institutions’, Center for European Studies Working Paper Series 52 (Cambridge: Center for European Studies).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (2002) ‘In Defense of the “Democratic Deficit”: Reassessing Legitimacy in the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies 40(4): 603–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (2006) ‘What Can We Learn from the Collapse of the European Constitutional Project?’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift 47(2): 219–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutz, D. C. (2008) ‘Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory?’, Annual Review of Political Science 11: 521–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyer, J. (2006) ‘The Deliberative Turn in Integration Theory’, Journal of European Public Policy 13(5): 779–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niesen, P. (2007) ‘Anarchie der kommunikativen Freiheit — ein Problemaufriss’, in P. Niesen and B. Herborth (eds), Anarchie der kommunikativen Freiheit. Jürgen Habermas und die Theorie der internationalen Politik (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brennan, J. and Raunio, T. (2007) ‘Introduction. Deparliamentarization and European integration’, in J. O’Brennan and T. Raunio (eds) National parliaments within the enlarged European Union. From ‘victims’ of integration to competitive actors? (London: Routledge) 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson, T. (2007) ‘Democratizing European Chemicals Policy: Do Consultations Favour Civil Society Participation?’, Journal of Civil Society 3(3): 223–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raunio, T. (2005) ‘Holding governments accountable in European affairs: Explaining cross-national variation’, Journal of Legislative Studies 11(3/4): 319–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raunio, T. (2007) ‘National legislatures in the EU Constitutional Treaty’, in J. O’Brennan and T. Raunio (eds) National parliaments within the enlarged European Union. From ‘victims’ of integration to competitive actors? (London: Routledge) 79–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W. H. (1982) Liberalism Against Populism: A Confrontation Between the Theory of Democracy and the Theory of Social Choice (Prospect Heights: Waveland Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T. and Van de Steeg, M. (2003) ‘An Emerging European Public Sphere? Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Clarifications’, Paper presented to the conference on the ‘Europeanization of Public Spheres, Political Mobilization, Public Communication and the European Union,’ Science Center Berlin, June 20–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittberger, B. (2003) ‘The Creation and Empowerment of the European Parliament’, Journal of Common Market Studies 42(2): 203–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittberger, B. (2005) Building Europe’s Parliament. Democratic Representation Beyond the Nation State (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rittberger, B. (2007) ‘Constructing Parliamentary Democracy in the European Union: How Did It Happen?’, in B. Kohler-Koch and B. Rittberger (eds) Debating the democratic Legitimacy of the European Union (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield) 111–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittberger, B. and Schimmelfennig, F. (eds) (2007) The Constitutionalization of the European Union (London: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, S. W. (ed.) (2007a) Deliberation, Participation and Democracy. Can the People Govern? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, S. W. (2007b) ‘An Introduction: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Research on Deliberative Democracy’, in S. W. Rosenberg (ed.), Deliberation, Participation and Democracy. Can the People Govern? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan) 1–22.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer, A. (2006) ‘Nach dem permissiven Konsens. Das Demokratiedefizit der Europäischen Union’, Leviathan 34(3): 350–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1997) ‘Introduction: the problem-solving capacity of multilevel governance’, Journal of European Public Policy 4(4): 520–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1999) Governing in Europe. Effective and Democratic? (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig, F. (2001) ‘The Community Trap: Liberal Norms, Rhetorical Action, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union’, International Organization 55(1): 47–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig, F. (2003) The EU, NATO and the Integration of Europe. Rules and Rhetoric (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig, F., Rittberger, B., Bürgin, A. and Schwellnus, G. (2006) ‘Conditions for EU constitutionalization: a qualitative comparative analysis’, Journal of European Public Policy 13(8): 1168–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger, P. and Kevin, D. (2000) ‘Can the European Union become a sphere of publics?’, in E. O. Eriksen and J. E. Fossum (eds), Democracy in the European Union. Integration through Deliberation? (London: Routledge) 206–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidendorf, S. (2007) Europäisierung nationaler Identitätsdiskurse? Ein Vergleich französische und deutscher Printmedien (Regieren in Europa Bd. 13) (Baden-Baden: Nomos).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, I. (2003) The State of Democratic Theory (Princeton: Princeton University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffek, J. and Nanz, P. (2008) ‘Emergent patterns of Civil Society Participation in Global and European Governance’, in J. Steffek, C. Kissling and P. Nanz (eds), Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance. A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffek, J., Kissling, C. and Nanz, P. (2008) Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance. A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, J. (2008) ‘Concept stretching: the case of deliberation’, European Political Science 7(2): 186–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D. F. (2008) ‘Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science’, Annual Review of Political Science 11: 497–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, R., Stokman, F. N., Achen, C. H. and T. König (2006) The European Union Decides (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. (1994) ‘The Power of the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda-Setter’, American Political Science Review 88: 128–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vreese, C. H. (2007) ‘The EU as a public sphere’, Living Reviews in European Governance 2(3): 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, M. E. (2001) Democracy and Association (Princeton: Princeton University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, J.H.H. (1995) ‘The State “über alles”: Demos, Telos and the German Maastricht Decision’, Jean Monnet Working Paper Series 6/95 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Law School).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, J. H. H., Haltern, U. and Mayer, F. C. (1995) ‘European Democracy and its Critique’, West European Politics 18(1): 4–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zweifel, T. D. (2002) ‘Who is without sin cast the first stone: the EU’s democratic deficit in comparison’, Journal of European Public Policy 9(5): 812–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Berthold Rittberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. American University, USA

    Michelle Egan (Associate Professor and Jean Monnet Chair of European Integration) (Associate Professor and Jean Monnet Chair of European Integration)

  2. Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

    Neill Nugent (Professor of Politics and Jean Monnet Professor of European Integration) (Professor of Politics and Jean Monnet Professor of European Integration)

  3. Aston University, UK

    William E. Paterson (Honorary Professor of European and German Politics) (Honorary Professor of European and German Politics)

Copyright information

© 2010 Berthold Rittberger

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rittberger, B. (2010). Democracy and European Union Governance. In: Egan, M., Nugent, N., Paterson, W.E. (eds) Research Agendas in EU Studies. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230279445_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation