"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

Walkabout Activities

Postcard from Samantha O\u27Connor, during the Linfield College Semester Abroad Program at James Cook University in Cairns, Australi

Is the grass greener on the other side? Norway’s assessment of Brexit

Is the grass greener on the other side, ask John Erik Fossum and Joachim Vigrestad (University of Oslo)? In this blog, the present the Norwegians’ assessments of Brexit and are that it may expose the special arrangements that EFTA states have to the EU

Is the Grass Greener on the Other Side? Norwegians’ Assessments of Brexit

To what extent has Brexit affected Norwegians’ perceptions of their current relationship with the EU? What are the considerations that central political and societal actors bring up to explain their stances? What are the broader lessons for the EU’s relations with non-members? We argue that Norway’s EU affiliation is so close that we can draw on Catherine De Vries’ benchmark theory to assess whether Brexit affects Norwegians’ assessments of Norway’s relationship with the EU. We focus on the Norwegian government’s stance. Further, we consider opinion polls to understand the strength of domestic support for the EEA Agreement, and whether that support has changed as a consequence of Brexit. We thereafter look for political entrepreneurs or political change agents, in political parties, in interest groups, and among civil society activists. We find that Brexit has not served as a benchmark. It has not set in motion efforts to change Norway’s EU affiliation. Opponents diverge on alternatives, although share concerns about what they see as the EU’s neoliberal orientation. The analysis shows that we cannot assess Brexit as a benchmark without paying attention to the sheer size and magnitude of the EU–Norway power asymmetry

Democratic constitution-making: reflections on the European experiment

'Mit der Erklärung von Laeken setzte die erste umfassende Debatte über eine Verfassung für Europa ein. Eine wichtige Frage ist, ob dies bereits einem konstitutionellen Moment in einem kritisch-normativen Sinn gleichkommt. Zwar können aus dem Laeken-Prozess normative Standards destilliert werden, die Komplexität des europäischen politischen Systems aber erfordert eine Anpassung unserer Konstitutionalisierungsmodelle, um den Anforderungen der Demokratie genüge zu tun. Der vorliegende Beitrag verweist auf die Spannung zwischen der Idee eines konstitutionellen Moments und dem Konzept der demokratischen Repräsentation und schlägt zur Lösung ein normatives Modell des deliberativen Konstitutionalismus' vor.' (Autorenreferat)'Laeken has ushered in the first continent-wide debate, on the issue of a European constitution. An important question is whether this amounts to Europe's constitutional moment in a critical normative sense. To address this we first distil out five core lessons from the Laeken experience. This serves to clarify which normative standards are relevant through reconstruction of those that actually informed the process. We find that the standards from normative theory are adequate, but that the complex European setting and experience throw up several thorny issues pertaining to how such a process can be organised, so as to comply with democratic norms, and whether it at all can be deemed to be representative. Our concern here is to shed light on how the tension between the idea of a constitutional moment and the notion of democratic representation can be resolved. To this end we develop a normative model of deliberative constitution-making.' (author's abstract

Multiheaded Federations: The EU and Canada Compared

The purpose of this article is to assess the merits of comparing the EU and Canada from a federal perspective. The point of departure is that both are federal-type entities that represent deviations from the standard or mainstream American model of federalism. That has given rise to alternative conceptions, multilevel governance for the EU, and a multinational federation for Canada. The article discusses the limitations of each such notion and instead argues for the merits of seeing both as different versions of multiheaded federation which is a useful analytical device for analyzing contestation over federalism within federal-type entities. This notion directs our attention to those with power and in the position to shape the political system’s federal-constitutional nature and design, which normally happens in the realm of constitutional politics. It is the fundamental struggle over sovereignty within a federal-type structure that gives rise to the notion of a multiheaded federation—there are multiple heads because there is no willingness to accept a hierarchical arrangement. The notion of a multiheaded federation is particularly suitable for capturing (de)federalisation processes and dynamics

Could the Norway model work for Britain? Twelve points to help you decide

While considering the EU Withdrawal Bill, the Lords passed an amendment to require the Commons to vote on remaining in the European Economic Area, bringing the possibility of a 'Norway model' for the UK back on the agenda. John Erik Fossum and Hans Petter Graver explain how this works and how it has affected Norway's relationship with the EU

La peculiare costituzione dell'Unione Europea

A unique political animal, the European Union has given rise to important constitutional conundrums and paradoxes that John Erik Fossum and Agustín José Menéndez explore in detail in this book. The authors consider the process of forging the EU's constitution and the set of fundamental norms that define the institutional structure, the decision-making procedures, and the foundations of the Union's democratic legitimacy. Their analysis illuminates the distinctive features of the EU's pluralist constitutional construct but also the interesting parallels to the Canadian constitutional experience and provides the tools to understand the Union's development, especially during the Laeken (2001–2005) and Lisbon (2007–2009) processes of constitutional reform