‘We the People’ versus ‘We the Heads of States’: the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

‘We the People’ versus ‘We the Heads of States’ : the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union. / Bang, Henrik; Jensen, Mads Christian Dagnis; Nedergaard, Peter.

In: Policy Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2, 5, 23.03.2015, p. 196-216.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Bang, H, Jensen, MCD & Nedergaard, P 2015, '‘We the People’ versus ‘We the Heads of States’: the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union', Policy Studies, vol. 36, no. 2, 5, pp. 196-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2014.1000846

APA

Bang, H., Jensen, M. C. D., & Nedergaard, P. (2015). ‘We the People’ versus ‘We the Heads of States’: the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union. Policy Studies, 36(2), 196-216. [5]. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2014.1000846

Vancouver

Bang H, Jensen MCD, Nedergaard P. ‘We the People’ versus ‘We the Heads of States’: the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union. Policy Studies. 2015 Mar 23;36(2):196-216. 5. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2014.1000846

Author

Bang, Henrik ; Jensen, Mads Christian Dagnis ; Nedergaard, Peter. / ‘We the People’ versus ‘We the Heads of States’ : the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union. In: Policy Studies. 2015 ; Vol. 36, No. 2. pp. 196-216.

Bibtex

@article{ded7cd3f8e1243aebb5b73cafd04ddb5,
title = "{\textquoteleft}We the People{\textquoteright} versus {\textquoteleft}We the Heads of States{\textquoteright}: the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union",
abstract = "The Eurozone crisis has rekindled the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union (EU). In this paper, the debate is reconsidered by contrasting the modus vivendi of {\textquoteleft}We the People{\textquoteright} in the USA with the modus vivendi of {\textquoteleft}We the Heads of States{\textquoteright} in the EU. It is demonstrated that many of the solutions to the alleged democratic deficit focus on how more voice can be given to {\textquoteleft}We the People{\textquoteright} on the input side, but that this goes against the functional logic of the EU system, thereby undermining its ability to govern. Instead, we argue that more attention should be given to how to increase output legitimacy, and a number of proposals are put forward. Such a reshuffling of the analytical focus is the best way forward to escape the current impasse in the debate on how to {\textquoteleft}fix{\textquoteright} democracy in the EU.",
keywords = "Faculty of Social Sciences, democratic deficit, EU, output, legitimacy",
author = "Henrik Bang and Jensen, {Mads Christian Dagnis} and Peter Nedergaard",
year = "2015",
month = mar,
day = "23",
doi = "10.1080/01442872.2014.1000846",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "196--216",
journal = "Policy Studies",
issn = "0144-2872",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘We the People’ versus ‘We the Heads of States’

T2 - the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union

AU - Bang, Henrik

AU - Jensen, Mads Christian Dagnis

AU - Nedergaard, Peter

PY - 2015/3/23

Y1 - 2015/3/23

N2 - The Eurozone crisis has rekindled the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union (EU). In this paper, the debate is reconsidered by contrasting the modus vivendi of ‘We the People’ in the USA with the modus vivendi of ‘We the Heads of States’ in the EU. It is demonstrated that many of the solutions to the alleged democratic deficit focus on how more voice can be given to ‘We the People’ on the input side, but that this goes against the functional logic of the EU system, thereby undermining its ability to govern. Instead, we argue that more attention should be given to how to increase output legitimacy, and a number of proposals are put forward. Such a reshuffling of the analytical focus is the best way forward to escape the current impasse in the debate on how to ‘fix’ democracy in the EU.

AB - The Eurozone crisis has rekindled the debate on the democratic deficit of the European Union (EU). In this paper, the debate is reconsidered by contrasting the modus vivendi of ‘We the People’ in the USA with the modus vivendi of ‘We the Heads of States’ in the EU. It is demonstrated that many of the solutions to the alleged democratic deficit focus on how more voice can be given to ‘We the People’ on the input side, but that this goes against the functional logic of the EU system, thereby undermining its ability to govern. Instead, we argue that more attention should be given to how to increase output legitimacy, and a number of proposals are put forward. Such a reshuffling of the analytical focus is the best way forward to escape the current impasse in the debate on how to ‘fix’ democracy in the EU.

KW - Faculty of Social Sciences

KW - democratic deficit

KW - EU

KW - output

KW - legitimacy

U2 - 10.1080/01442872.2014.1000846

DO - 10.1080/01442872.2014.1000846

M3 - Journal article

VL - 36

SP - 196

EP - 216

JO - Policy Studies

JF - Policy Studies

SN - 0144-2872

IS - 2

M1 - 5

ER -

ID: 130933723