"Europe in Transformation: How to Reconstitute Democracy?"

Europeanization and globalization are frequently held to undermine national democracy; hence raising the democracy in the multi-level constellation that makes up the European Union? We present three models for how democracy can be reconstituted: (a) it can be reconstituted at the national level, as delegated democracy with a concomitant reframing of the EU as a functional regulatory regime; (b) through establishing the EU as a multi-national state based on a common identity(ies) and solidaristic allegiance strong enough to undertake collective action; or (c) through the development of a post-national Union with an explicit cosmopolitan imprint. These are the only viable models of European democracy, as they are the only ones that can ensure equal membership in a self-governing polity. They differ however with regard to both applicability and robustness

Representation through deliberation-The European case

This article shows that the main pattern of European democratization has unfolded along the lines of an EU organized as a multilevel system of representative parliamentary government and not as a system of deliberative governance as the transnationalists propound. But the multilevel EU has developed a structure of representation that is theoretically challenging. In order to come to grips with this we present an institutional variant of deliberative theory, which understands democracy as the combination of a principle of justification and an organizational form. It comes with the following explanatory mechanisms: claimsmaking, justification and learning which in the EU also program institutional copying and emulation mechanisms. We show that the EU has established an incomplete system of representative democracy steeped in a distinct representation-deliberation interface, which has emerged through a particular and distinct configuration of democratization mechanisms

Norway’s rejection of EU membership has given the country less self-determination, not more

Norway rejected membership of the European Union in a referendum in 1994, but participates in the single market through the European Economic Area (EEA) agreement. Erik O. Eriksen argues that while the referendum campaign was won largely on the basis of an appeal to democracy and the principle of the country retaining power over its own laws, the opposite has occurred in practice. He writes that Norway has become deeply entangled in the European integration project and is, for all intents and purposes, part of the EU, but without any influence

'You'll hate it': why the Norway option amounts to self-inflicted subservience to the EU

Why did David Cameron decline 'the Norway option', and why did the Norwegian prime minister warn Britain against Brexit, saying 'You'll hate it'? Erik O Eriksen (University of Oslo) argues that for the UK, the so-called Norway option of EEA membership would amount to self-inflicted subservience to the EU. Norwegians have traded any say in EU rules for all-important access to the Single Market. ..

Grenser for styring? : samfunnsstyring og rasjonalitet i et kritisk perspektiv

Hovedfagsoppgave i samfunnsvitenskap, høsten 198

Lessons from Norway: the case for a second referendum on Brexit

Britons did not vote over what type of relationship or association the UK should have with the EU post-Brexit. The UK should hold a second referendum over the final deal of the negotiations with the EU. In this blog, Erik O. Eriksen (ARENA Centre for European Studies) draws on Norwegian experiences in arguing that there should be a second referendum on Brexit. After all, he argues, the UK is a parliamentary democracy and referenda are only advisory