Understanding the \u2018EU democratic deficit\u2019: a two-dimension concept on a three level-of-analysis (original) (raw)

Understanding the EU democratic deficit

Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science, 2008

This paper acknowledges the still unsettled debate on the EU democratic deficit by arguing that divergences among the scholars emanate from the methodological and the conceptual difficulties that the concept itself have when applied to the case of EU. Given the lack of a common ground for understanding the EU democratic deficit debate I propose an all-inclusive model (Democratic Deficit Space) of how to understand the EU democratic deficit arguments in the enormous already existing literature. As a last but not least point this paper will suggest how we need to look at the EU democratic deficit, putting the emphasis on the deficit term rather than on the democracy term.

The Problem of " Democratic Deficit " in the European Union

This study tries to understand the causes and effects of the problem of democratic deficit in the European Union (EU). There is a multitude of reasons and solutions regarding the democratic deficit in the EU, which lead to complex interpretations. Generally, academic literature on the issue of democratic deficit in EU relies on two opposing arguments. The majority argument is that there is democratic deficit in the EU; the minority argument rejects this view it. This study falls within the majority argument. The majority argument draws on the two dimensions of the EU. First argument asserts (institutional) that the EU's institutional design and structure is not democratic. Second argument (socio-psychological) claims that the EU is not capable of being a 'real' democracy in principle, since the structural and social prerequisites, on which democratic rule depends, are lacking at the European level.

The democratic deficit of the EU: Breaking the spell of a false analogy

European View, 2021

The article contains a critique of the concept of the democratic deficit of the EU. Its logical unsustainability is revealed by demonstrating that it is based on the ‘fallacy of false analogy’. Several of the numerous implications of this assertion are elaborated, with a special emphasis on the ‘no-demos thesis’. The article does not treat the idea of the democratic deficit of the EU merely as an analytical concept that is based on a false analogy and thus logically incorrect. For the concept has been persistently used in political debates as one of the most destructive tools against the EU. The concluding section contains a radical proposal for a counter-offensive in favour of European integration.

The EU and its democratic deficit: problems and (possible) solutions

European View, 2012

Despite the different approaches to the term 'democratic deficit', the majority of scholars today focus on political legitimacy and accountability. In this paper we assess the democratic deficit of EU institutions, more precisely the European Commission and the European Parliament. We suggest how this deficit could be overcome through the EU treaty changes, which would create more balanced powers in the EU. We evaluate briefly the attempt of European institutions to increase political participation among EU citizens, where the Internet is found to be a very helpful tool.

Why there is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik

JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 2006

connex-C-05-02.pdf. © Each EUROGOV Paper and its format and content (texts, images, data etc.) are protected by legislation on Intellectual Property, and may not be used, reproduced, distributed, modified, publicly disclosed, conveyed or transformed in any other way without the explicit permission of the Author(s). The common scientific citation is exempted from these property rights.

Does the European Union Suffer from a Democratic Deficit?

2019

The European Union has given rise to increased levels of communication and interaction between continental Europe. Formed in the wake of the second world war, the EU then known as the European Coal and Steel Community as well as the European Economic Community has successfully brought peace to Europe, after periods of continental and global war. Although the EU has been successful in creating peace in Europe, it is often subjected to criticism that it operates in such a manner that there is a democratic deficit in its proceedings. On the first inspection to these claims, it can appear to be confusing when analysing of how the EU operates. As part of its membership criteria, the EU insists on member states being a consistent and stable institution that actively promotes democratic systems of governance, this certainly does not sound like an institution that has a democratic deficit in its governance. Porchez advises that arguments of the EU operating with a democratic deficit are not original, and suggests that the democratic deficit started with the Single European Act (1987) and the Maastricht Treaty (1992). Both the Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty transferred power away from EU member national states to the EU as a whole, accounting towards more decision-making taking place in the EU and away from the member state. The EU does not shy away from accusations of democratic deficit, it instead aims to balance the link between governance and EU citizens, with increased powers of the European Parliament to reject policies and regulations. However, it poses the question of if this is enough to end the claims of the EU being democratically deficit. This paper will examine EU levels of governance, it will highlight areas in which claims of a deficit in democratic proceedings are justified to some extent.