Conceptualizing Legitimacy

2020 ◽  
pp. 25-55
Author(s):  
Vivien A. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Interaction Effects ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Philosophical Perspective ◽  
Eu Governance ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
The Eu

Chapter 2 investigates questions of democracy and legitimacy in the EU; defines the three legitimizing mechanisms of output, input, and throughput; and then examines the five main criteria for throughput legitimation—efficacy, accountability, transparency, inclusiveness, and openness. The chapter begins with foundational definitions of legitimacy in liberal democracy based not only on a governing body’s authority but also on its activities. For the latter, it then explores the concepts of input, output, and throughput legitimacy; sets them in historical philosophical perspective; and differentiates them from one another. Lastly, the chapter discusses the different criteria that make up throughput legitimacy, provides examples from EU governance, and discusses their interaction effects. Efficacy is defined in terms of efficiency in policymaking, with illustrations drawn from the challenges EU actors have faced to improve governance processes. Accountability is first defined generally as public officials giving account and being held to account in technical and political forums, and then discussed in terms of EU actors’ accountability and the forums to which they may (or may not) be accountable. Transparency is defined as ensuring citizen access to information about governance policies and processes, with examples of the ways in which EU actors may (or may not) be transparent for good (or bad) reasons. Inclusiveness and openness are defined as EU actors’ willingness to engage with citizens (mainly organized in interest groups) and discussed in terms of their successes or failures to bring in citizens in ways that ensure balance and fairness in representation.

scholarly journals Prioritizing professionals? How the democratic and professionalized nature of interest groups shapes their degree of access to EU officials

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 485-501
Author(s):  
Adrià Albareda
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Organizational Capacity ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Organizational Attributes ◽  
Governance Systems ◽  
Increasing Trend ◽  
Member Involvement ◽  
Eu Commission ◽  
The Eu

AbstractInterest groups are key intermediary actors between civil society and public officials. The EU has long emphasized the importance of interacting with representative groups that involve their members. Additionally, there is an increasing trend toward the professionalization of groups that invest in organizational capacities to efficiently provide policy expertise. Both member involvement and organizational capacity are crucial features for groups to function as transmission belts that aggregate and transfer the preferences of their members to policymakers, thus reinforcing the legitimacy and efficiency of governance systems. Yet, not all groups have these organizational attributes. This paper quantitatively examines the effects of interest groups’ investment in member involvement and organizational capacity on the level of access to EU Commission officials. The results indicate that member involvement does not pay off in terms of higher levels of access. In contrast, groups with high organizational capacities have more meetings with public officials of the Commission.

scholarly journals A Cross-Country Measurement of the EU Bioeconomy: An Input–Output Approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 3033
Author(s):  
Kutay Cingiz ◽  
Hugo Gonzalez-Hermoso ◽  
Wim Heijman ◽  
Justus H. H. Wesseler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Union Member ◽  
National Income ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Income Share ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

This paper measures the development of the national income share of the bioeconomy for 28 European Union Member States (MS) and 16 industries of BioMonitor scope from 2005 to 2015. The paper proposes a model which includes the up- and downstream linkages using Input-Output tables. The results show that for the majority of the MS the value added of the up- and downstream sector is at the band of 40%–50% of the total bioeconomy value added and has on average increased since the financial crisis.

scholarly journals The health care sector in the economies of the European Union: an overview using an input–output framework

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Gutiérrez-Hernández ◽  
Ignacio Abásolo-Alessón
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
European Union ◽  
Labour Productivity ◽  
Health Care Sector ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Input Output ◽  
National Currencies ◽  
Market Production ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Purchasing Power Parities

Abstract Background This study aims to analyse the relative importance of the health care sector (health care activities and services), its interrelations with the rest of productive activities, aggregate supply and demand, employment requirements and apparent labour productivity in the European Union (EU) economy as a whole, and in the economies of member countries. Methods The methodology used is based on input–output analysis. Data are extracted from National Accounts and, specifically, from the input–output framework for 2010. Data in national currencies are adjusted using as a conversion factor, specific purchasing power parities for health. Results In the EU, market production predominates in the provision of health care activities, which are financed mainly by public funding. However, there is significant variability among countries, and, in fact, non-market production predominates in most EU countries. The health care sector has direct backward and forward linkages lower than the average for all sectors of the economy and the average for the services sector. Thus, this sector is relatively independent of the rest of the productive structure in the EU. The health care activities industry is key because of its ability to generate value added and employment. Regarding apparent labour productivity, there are significant differences among EU countries, showing that productivity is positively related to the weight of market production in health care activities and negatively related to the number of hours worked per person employed. Conclusions Our results provide useful insights for health authorities in the EU, as they analyse the effect of health policies on macroeconomic indicators using an input–output framework, as well as comparing these effects with those in EU member countries. To the best of our knowledge, an analysis of the health care sector in the EU economy and the countries that integrate it using an input–output framework has not been undertaken. In addition, to compare health care expenditure between countries, data in national currencies have been adjusted using specific purchasing power parities for “health”, and not ones referring to the total economy (GDP), which is common practice in many previous studies.

Can the EU be a federal democracy? Assessing the horizontal and vertical dimension of the EU government from comparative perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared Sonnicksen
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Democratic Government ◽  
Eu Governance ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
Democratic Character ◽  
Comparative Federalism ◽  
The Government ◽  
Power Arrangements ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe European Union remains an ambivalent polity. This uncertainty complicates the assessment of its democratic and federal quality. Drawing on comparative federalism research can contribute not only to making sense of whether, or rather which kind of federalism the EU has developed. It can also enable addressing such a compounded, but necessary inquiry into the federal and democratic character of the EU and how to ascertain which type of democratic government for which type of federal union may be appropriate. The article first elaborates a framework to assess the dimensions of federal and democratic government, drawing on comparative federalism research to delineate basic types of federal democracy. Here the democratic dimension of government is taken as referring primarily to the horizontal division of powers (among ‘branches’) of government, the federal dimension to the vertical division of powers (among ‘levels’) of governments. The framework is applied to the government of the EU in order to gauge its own type(s) of division of power arrangements and the interlinkage between them. Finally, the discussion reflects on whether or rather how the EU could comprise a federal democracy, especially in light of recent crisis challenges and subsequent institutional developments in EU governance.

Wpływ populizmu na demokrację liberalną: na przykładzie prawicy (PiS i Kukiz’15) w wyborach parlamentarnych w Polsce w 2015 roku

1970 ◽  
Vol 20 (274) ◽  
pp. 3-14
Author(s):  
Marek Tyrała
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Research Problem ◽  
Philosophical Perspective ◽  
Parliamentary Elections ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Research Hypothesis ◽  
Interdisciplinary Character

The main research hypothesis put in the article is: Populist parties have a negative impact on the functioning of liberal democracy in Poland. The article attempts to characterize and define the main criterion distinguishing populist parties and anti-system movements against the background of standard political parties. The article also attempts to characterize the process of functioning of liberal democracy in Poland. The text has an interdisciplinary character, the research problem has been analyzed from a political, sociological and philosophical perspective. While verifying the hypothesis put in the work, it was noticed that there is a high probability that the election success of populist parties and movements had a negative impact on the process of functioning of liberal democracy in Poland after the parliamentary elections. An attempt to verify the research hypothesis can make a significant contribution to further studying the functioning of the party and anti-system movements in the process of electoral rivalry in Poland.

Fundamental rights protection within the EU governance through the CJEU's jurisprudence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Μαρία-Νεφέλη Βακουλή
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Judicial Activism ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Eu Governance ◽  
The Eu

Η παρούσα διατριβή αναλύει το ζήτημα της προστασίας των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων της ΕΕ με ειδική αναφορά στον ρόλο του Δικαστηρίου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης (ΔΕΕ) και της νομολογίας του στα πλαίσια της ευρωπαϊκής διακυβέρνησης. Η νομολογία του ΔΕΕ περί την προστασία των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων αναλύεται με επίκεντρο το Δικαστήριο ως θεσμικό όργανο της ΕΕ και διερευνάται ο ρόλος του ΔΕΕ στην επίτευξη της ευρωπαϊκής ολοκλήρωσης. Εξετάζει την αντιμετώπιση από το ΔΕΕ των ζητημάτων περί το άσυλο με ιδιαίτερη έμφαση στη νομολογία μετά τη Λισαβόνα. Επιπλέον, η παρούσα διατριβή εξετάζει τον ρόλο του ΔΕΕ στα πλαίσια σύγχρονων ζητημάτων σε ευρωπαϊκό και διεθνές επίπεδο, όπως η πρόσφατη απόφαση του Γερμανικού Συνταγματικού Δικαστηρίου (PSPP judgement), η Κοινή Δήλωση ΕΕ-Τουρκίας και η προσχώρηση της ΕΕ στην ΕΣΔΑ. Το Μέρος Ι, «Θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα της ΕΕ και ΔΕΕ», προσδιορίζει το αντικείμενο της έρευνας και θέτει το επιλεγμένο θεωρητικό πλαίσιο. Αναλύει την προστασία των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων της ΕΕ από το ΔΕΕ μέσω της θεωρίας του Ιστορικού θεσμισμού. Επικεντρώνεται στον θεσμικό ρόλο του Δικαστηρίου στη θέσπιση της έννομης τάξης της ΕΕ. Η Συνθήκη της Λισαβόνας και ο Χάρτης των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της ΕΕ αναλύονται ως κρίσιμες στιγμές στην πορεία της νομολογίας του Δικαστηρίου. Αναλύεται το θεμελιώδες δικαίωμα στο άσυλο όπως αυτό προστατεύεται από το άρθρο 18 του Χάρτη Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της ΕΕ. Το Μέρος II, «Προστασία των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων σε καιρό κρίσης», πραγματεύεται την δικαστική προστασία των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων της ΕΕ στο πλαίσιο της προσφυγικής/μεταναστευτικής κρίσης και παράσχει μια λεπτομερή περιγραφή της κρίσης ως φαινομένου με ισχυρή δυναμική που δύναται να επηρεάσει τη διαδικασία της ευρωπαϊκής ολοκλήρωσης. Η διατριβή περιλαμβάνει ολοκληρωμένη επισκόπηση της νομολογίας του Δικαστηρίου βάσει έρευνας μέσω της πλατφόρμας EUR-Lex αναφορικά με τη νομοθεσία για το ΚΕΣΑ και τον κανονισμό του Δουβλίνου στα πλαίσιο της διαδικασίας για το προδικαστικό ερώτημα. Εισάγονται οι έννοιες του «ισορροπημένου δικαστικού ακτιβισμού» (balanced judicial activism) και της «αιτιολογημένης δικαστικής παθητικότητας» (justifiable judicial passivism) που θέτουν τα όρια στην λήψη αποφάσεων του ΔΕΕ. Και για τις δύο έννοιες, ο «κίνδυνος» για την ευρωπαϊκή ολοκλήρωση είναι ζωτικής σημασίας. Τέλος, γίνεται αναφορά στη δικαστική αλληλεπίδραση μεταξύ του ΔΕΕ και του ΕΔΔΑ και τίθεται το ερώτημα εάν η αλληλεπίδραση αυτή αρκεί για να εξασφαλιστεί η συνοχή στην προστασία των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων στην Ευρώπη ή αν απαιτείται το επόμενο βήμα, ήτοι η προσχώρηση της ΕΕ στην ΕΣΔΑ.

State-building and the European Union: Markets, War, and Europe's Uneven Political Development

2021 ◽  
pp. 001041402110473
Author(s):  
R. Daniel Kelemen ◽  
Kathleen R. McNamara
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Political Development ◽  
Institutional Development ◽  
State Building ◽  
Legal Authority ◽  
Market Forces ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Governance ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Eu

The European Union’s institutional development is highly imbalanced. It has established robust legal authority and institutions, but it remains weak or impotent in terms of its centralization of fiscal, administrative, and coercive capacity. We argue that situating the EU in terms of the history of state-building allows us to better understand the outcomes of EU governance. Historically, political projects centralizing power have been most complete when both market and security pressures are present to generate state formation. With the EU, market forces have had a far greater influence than immediate military threats. We offer a preliminary demonstration of the promise of this approach by applying it to two empirical examples, the euro and the Schengen area. Our analysis suggests that the EU does not need to be a Weberian state, nor be destined to become one, for the state-building perspective to shed new light on its processes of political development.

13. Environmental Policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 297-320
Author(s):  
Andrea Lenschow
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Coordination ◽  
Historical Evolution ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Environmental Interest Groups ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the European Union’s environmental policy, the development of which was characterized by institutional deepening and the substantial expansion of environmental issues covered by EU decisions and regulations. Environmental policy presents a host of challenges for policy-makers, including the choice of appropriate instruments, improvement of implementation performance, and better policy coordination at all levels of policy-making. The chapter points to the continuing adaptations that have been made in these areas. It first considers the historical evolution of environmental policy in the EU before discussing the main actors in EU environmental policy-making, namely: the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and environmental interest groups. The chapter also looks at the EU as an international actor.

5. Governance Approaches

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Guy Peters ◽  
Jon Pierre
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Multilevel Governance ◽  
Social Structures ◽  
Governance Capacity ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Eu Governance ◽  
European Governance ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the European Union’s capacity to govern effectively. It argues that the creation of governance capacity for the institutions within the EU is the goal of much of the process of integration. While European integration is to some extent an end in itself, it may also be the means for attaining the capacity to govern a large territory with complex economic and social structures. The chapter first explains what governance is before discussing various criticisms levelled against it and how governance works in Europe. It then outlines a number of propositions about European governance, focusing on multilevel governance, the role of governance in output legitimization, and the claim that European governance remains undemocratic, is highly segmented, and is transforming. The chapter proceeds by looking at changes in European governance styles and policy issues, along with their implications for European integration. Finally, it explores the consequences of enlargement for EU governance.

14. Interest Groups and the European Union

2019 ◽  
pp. 201-218
Author(s):  
Rainer Eising
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Group System ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Group Structures ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the role of interest groups in European Union (EU) politics. It also considers the way in which the EU institutions influence interest group structures and activities. The chapter begins with an overview of the relationship between the EU institutions and interest groups and examines the steps taken thus far to regulate that relationship. It then looks at the evolution and the structure of the interest group system, focusing in particular on two salient aspects: the difference between national and EU organizations; and the difference between specific and diffuse interests.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document