Solving the EU's democratic deficit through direct democratic veto rights? A critical assessment of Heidrun Abromeit's concept

Nonfiction, Social & Cultural Studies, Political Science
Cover of the book Solving the EU's democratic deficit through direct democratic veto rights? A critical assessment of Heidrun Abromeit's concept by Lutz Weischer, GRIN Publishing
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Lutz Weischer ISBN: 9783638740203
Publisher: GRIN Publishing Publication: June 17, 2007
Imprint: GRIN Publishing Language: English
Author: Lutz Weischer
ISBN: 9783638740203
Publisher: GRIN Publishing
Publication: June 17, 2007
Imprint: GRIN Publishing
Language: English

Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: European Union, grade: 2,0, Free University of Berlin (Otto-Suhr-Institut für Politikwissenschaft), course: Proseminar 'Constitutionalism, Federalism and Democracy in the European Union', 11 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: At a time of enlargement and public discussion about the European Union's proposed constitutional treaty, there is a growing concern about the democratic legitimacy of the union's institutions and decisions. In fact, most scholars agree that there is a democratic deficit in the European Union Some possible solutions are widely debated, especially a strengthening of the European Parliament.Heidrun Abromeit, a German political scientist, has proposed a solution that is different. Based on specific theoretical assumptions about democracy and the democratic deficit, she has developed the model of 'regional and sectoral direct-democratic veto rights' In this paper, I will present and asses this model. This critical assessment will have to be twofold: In a first step, the assessment has to consider the model itself: Are the model and the assumptions it is based on theoretically convincing or are there inherent contradictions? The second step, then, will be to check whether the model is the right solution for the present situation, i.e. the actual democratic deficit of the European Union. Would it overcome the democratic deficit? The answers in this second step have to be based on a coherent concept which defines democracy, explains what democracy on the European level should look like and what are the reasons for the present deficit. As I mentioned before, there a numerous concepts on this matter which are partly contradictory. Obviously, I cannot develop my own coherent concept of European democracy in this short paper. I will therefore base my judgement on the concept developed by Fritz W. Scharpf. I have chosen Scharpf's ideas as a point of reference because - thanks to the notions of input and output legitimacy - he has developed a concept that is differentiated enough to deal with the complex issues of the European integration process. Methodologically, an important part of this paper will therefore be based on a comparison between Abromeit and Scharpf. This implies that the paper will not come to a definitive conclusion on the appropriateness of Abromeit's ideas but will only show how Abromeit's ideas can be judged if one accepts Scharpf's perspective. My hypothesis is that, from this perspective, Abromeit does not present an appropriate solution to the democratic deficit because a)her model focuses too much on input legitimacy and b)her model favours negative integration and renders positive integration increasingly difficult.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: European Union, grade: 2,0, Free University of Berlin (Otto-Suhr-Institut für Politikwissenschaft), course: Proseminar 'Constitutionalism, Federalism and Democracy in the European Union', 11 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: At a time of enlargement and public discussion about the European Union's proposed constitutional treaty, there is a growing concern about the democratic legitimacy of the union's institutions and decisions. In fact, most scholars agree that there is a democratic deficit in the European Union Some possible solutions are widely debated, especially a strengthening of the European Parliament.Heidrun Abromeit, a German political scientist, has proposed a solution that is different. Based on specific theoretical assumptions about democracy and the democratic deficit, she has developed the model of 'regional and sectoral direct-democratic veto rights' In this paper, I will present and asses this model. This critical assessment will have to be twofold: In a first step, the assessment has to consider the model itself: Are the model and the assumptions it is based on theoretically convincing or are there inherent contradictions? The second step, then, will be to check whether the model is the right solution for the present situation, i.e. the actual democratic deficit of the European Union. Would it overcome the democratic deficit? The answers in this second step have to be based on a coherent concept which defines democracy, explains what democracy on the European level should look like and what are the reasons for the present deficit. As I mentioned before, there a numerous concepts on this matter which are partly contradictory. Obviously, I cannot develop my own coherent concept of European democracy in this short paper. I will therefore base my judgement on the concept developed by Fritz W. Scharpf. I have chosen Scharpf's ideas as a point of reference because - thanks to the notions of input and output legitimacy - he has developed a concept that is differentiated enough to deal with the complex issues of the European integration process. Methodologically, an important part of this paper will therefore be based on a comparison between Abromeit and Scharpf. This implies that the paper will not come to a definitive conclusion on the appropriateness of Abromeit's ideas but will only show how Abromeit's ideas can be judged if one accepts Scharpf's perspective. My hypothesis is that, from this perspective, Abromeit does not present an appropriate solution to the democratic deficit because a)her model focuses too much on input legitimacy and b)her model favours negative integration and renders positive integration increasingly difficult.

More books from GRIN Publishing

Cover of the book Erklärungen zur Offenbarung Jesu Christi nach Parallelstellen der Bibel by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Depoliticisation as an orthodox account of British economic policy since 1997 by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book An Analysis of the Effect of Ideology on the Life Expectancy of Terrorist Organisations by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Philip Roth - How to Deal with Postmodern Reality, or, Changes in Fiction Writing. by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book The Get-Passives as an Emotive Language Device by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Diplomacy in the context of the Nigeria Civil War by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Alfred Hitchcock: Notorious by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Reforms for political and economic independence by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Determinants Of The Capital Structure Of The Cement Industry From Pakistan by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book The Credit on Real Estate - Local Value and Relevance for the Construction Financing in Germany and Denmark by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book An Analysis of Ryanair's Corporate Strategy by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book What are the main impediments to democracy in Africa by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book The high failure rates of cross-border mergers due to the focus of companies on hard factors by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Theorie und Praxis der deutschen Landerziehungsheime unter der Leitung von Hermann Lietz by Lutz Weischer
Cover of the book Corpus Linguistics: Lexicography and Semantics: Introduction to Concordance and Collocations by Lutz Weischer
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy