European Integration as a Challenge to Political and Democratic Theory

European Integration as a Challenge to Political and Democratic Theory Morten Kelstrup 22. October 2007 Plan 1. • • • European integration as a challenge to political theory How do we understand European integration? How does EU function as a political system? How can – and shall – EU be constructed? 2. • • • • • European integration as a challenge to democratic theory Criteria for democracy The ”democracy dilemma” How can we think of democracy ”beyond the nation state”? The debate about EU’s ”democratic deficit” How can EU become more democratic legitimate? 3. 4. Democracy and EU’s latest reform: the Reform Treaty Conclusions Understanding European integration • What is European integration? • Different dimensions • Political integration ”Political integration is the process whereby political actors in several distinct national settings are persuaded to shift their loyalties, expectations and political activities towards a new centre, whose institutions possess or demand jurisdiction over the pre-existing national states. The end result of a process of political integration is a new political community, superimposed over the preexisting ones”. (Haas, 1961) Change in perspectives • How can European integration be explained? – Integration theories (functionalism, federalism, neofunctionalism, intergovernmentalism) – New questions and new developments in understanding integration • The ”governance turn” in integration studies • How are we to understand the EU today? – EU can be regarded as a political system – A combination of ”multi level governance” and ”intergovernmentalism” • How are we to deal with the constructive and normative debate? Wiener and Dietz (eds), 2004, p. 7 On EU’s political system The EU has developed as a political system Basic features 1. There is a stable and clearly defined set of institutions for collective decision-making and a set of rules governing relations between and within these institutions. 2. Political input: Citizens and social groups seek to realize their political desires through the political system, either directly of through intermediary organisations such as interest groups and political parties. 3. Political output: Collective decisions in the political system have a significant impact on the distribution of economic resources and the allocation of social and political values across the whole system. 4. Feedback: There is continuous interaction (’feedback’) between these political outputs, new demands on the system, new decisions and so on. (Based on Hix, EU’s Political System 2005, p. 2) The EU political system From Hix, 2005, p 6. EU as a challenge: central debates • In relation to ”international relations”: What kind of actor is the EU in international relations? – A different kind of actor? – A ”normative” and ”negotiating” actor? • In relation to ”comparative politics”: – The ”sui generis debate” – EU as political system which is not a state – The ”normative turn” in the study of the EU • In relation to ”public management” – Understanding the ”effects of Europe” – Different dynamics in ”Europeanisation” EU as a challenge to democratic theory On the understanding of democracy – Democracy as governing of the people, by the people and for the people – The protection of the citizens and civil society by the authorites (Hobbes) and also the protection of the citizens against the authorities (Locke) – The tension between societal and political democracy Many different models of democracy – and different criteria Varieties of democracy On the basis of David Held: Models of Democracy, 1987/97) Criteria for democracy Political democracy 1) Participation (direct or through elections and representation) 2) Competition (in elections and for positions) 3) Protection (through constitutional control and/or checks and balance) Societal democracy 4) Participation (equal political rights and de facto participation) 5) Competition (freedom of expression and free public debate) 6) Protection (prevailing respect for each individual and their basic rights) Internal consistency 7) Principle of people sovereignty: the highest sovereignty is the people (as individuals or as a collective/community) 8) Principle of congruency: those affected by political decisions should have influence on the decisions on which they depend. Political power should be accountable. From Kelstrup, 1999, s. 95-96 Dimensions of democracy From Kelstrup, 1999, 102 How are we to think about democracy in relation to EU? • • Can the different dimension be applied on the EU? The democracy dilemma The dilemma arises if one only thinks about democracy as linked to the state. The dilemma is that either democracy has to be linked to nation states (with the negative consequence that power beyond the nation state is not controlled democratically) or democracy has to be established on the European level as a state-formation (with the negative consequence that national democracies are undermined). • We need to think about democracy ”beyond the state” On democracy in relation to the EU • Which elements of democracy can be extended beyond the nation state? • How can power be controlled – in systems of ’multi-level governance’? • Can the EU become more democratic legitimate without becoming a state? EU’s democratic deficit (”Standard version”, Hix og Follesdal, 2006) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. EU implies ”..increase in executive power and a decrease in national parliamentary control” ”the European Parliament is too weak” ”there are no European elections” ”the EU is simply ’too distant’ from voters” ”European integration produces ’political drift’ from voters’ ideal policy preferences” Elements in the debate on EU’s democratic deficit • • There is no European people (the ”no demos-thesis”) No common language, history, culture Common identity? Common, European public sphere? Common electorate? Common values? Common political community? Decision far away from the common citizen Unsatisfactory participation/unequal participation Unequal representation • • • • • • • • • • • Limits to EUP’s position (low participation in European elections, elections ”secondary”, no opposition, limits in competences) Lack of possibility for change in ”government”/the Council/the Commision through election Lack of collective responsibility in the Council Insufficient openness? A technocratic bias for the Commission? Unclear rules on specific areas (Comitology?) Too much left to independent bodies (the Court, ECB)? (”Captured institutions?) ”Bias” in output for ”negative” integration? • • • • • Simon Hix about EU’s democratic deficit ”The EU is not a representative democracy. We elect our governments, who negotiate on our behalf in Brussels, and decide who forms the EU-excecutive: The Commission. However, national governments are the product of national electoral contests, about national issues, fought by national parties, and over the control of national governmental office. EP elections, moreover, are sub-products of this process. … EP-elections are fought as second-order national contests… In no sense, therefore, are Europe’s voters able to choose between rival programmes for Europe or ’through out’ those who exercise political power at the European level” Hix, 1999, 186 Andrew Moravcsik on EU’s lack of democratic deficit ”My central contention here is that, if we adopt reasonable criteria for judging democratic governance, then the widespread criticism of the EU as democratically illegitimate is unsupported by the existing empirical evidence. … Constitutional checks and balances, indirect democratic control via national governments, and the increasing powers of the European Parliament are sufficient to ensure that the EU policy-making is, in nearly all cases, clean, transparent, effective and politically responsive to the demands of European citizens. From Moravcsik, 2003, 79 Arguments and recommendations Hix and Føllesdal – There is not ”electoral contests about the political leadership at the European level or the basic direction of the EU policy agenda” – Recommendation: Institutional reform, in particular • Open meetings in the Council • Debate about the political functions of the Commission • More debate and contestantion about politics in the EU (for instance direct election af a president, increased polititization (European parties) Can EU in other ways increase its democratic legitimacy? 1. Improvements in ’legality’? 2. Improvements in regard to ’identity’ and political community? 3. Improvements in regard to ’representative structures’ and ’accountability’? 4. Improvement in ’output-legitimacy’? 5. Improvements in direct and indirect legitimation? Democracy and EU’s latest reform: the Reform Treaty Historical development • From ”the community method” to a ”semi-parliamentary system” – Direct election of the European Parliamen (1979) – Increased competences, in particular 1986 and 1992 • The debate about legitimacy in the 1990’s – The Maastricht Treaty – and the Danish ”no” – The Laken process • The Convention, the Constitutional Treaty and the following crisis • Paradox: A democratic refusal of democratisation? The formulations in the Reform Treaty about the ”democratic principles” (art. 8 EU, A, B and C) Art. 8 EU: The principle of democratic equality Art. 8 A: The principle of representative democracy, incl. Representation in EUP Right of citizens to participate Establishment of ”politcal parties at the European level” Art. 8 B: The principle of participatory democracy i.a. dialogue, hearings, petition-possiblity Art. 8 C: A stronger role to the national parliaments Conclusions • European integration – and the EU – is in many ways a major challenge to political theory. Also to the different subdisciplins. • It is still a major challenge to understand the EU and its characteristics. One possibility is to characterise it as a political system. • EU is also a major challenge to democratic theory: It is necessary to think about democracy ”beyond the nation state” • There is no easy solution to compensation for EU’s ”democratic deficit” • The EU can become more democratic legitimate on several dimension – without becoming a state-like democracy • The ”Reform Treaty” is a new compromise in EU’s system of multi-level governance. It has some democratic features, but is not a solution to EU’s problems with democracy