Governments in Action

How can Danish governments that are almost exclusively minority governments work and even work well? We present an analysis of legislative voting since 1973, and while it does support an impression of consensual politics, we argue that it is the option of bloc politics that can make minority governments strong and effective. When the ‘real’ opposition, i.e. the parties that would rather see a different government, know that the government can use its bloc majority to pass legislation anyway, it becomes more cooperative. This gives the government more than one possible way of passing legislation. We further argue that legislative agreements (forlig) are an important tool that helps minority governments govern. The long-term commitment that they entail makes it more attractive for opposition parties to strike deals with the government. Legislative agreements can work almost as issue-specific majority governments.

Corruption and Bureaucratic Reforms

In 2018, Denmark was the least corrupt country worldwide according to Transparency International. Such absence of corruption is an important ingredient in ‘Getting to Denmark’ and achieving well-functioning institutions. It is, however, a puzzle how a state can reach such a situation. Recent studies have suggested that critical junctures in the evolution of today’s levels of corruption can be traced through early and pragmatic bureaucratic reforms that efficiently fought corruption, thus preceding the onset of the modern welfare state. The question we raise is whether historical bureaucratic reforms can explain today’s low level of corruption in Denmark. We argue that the sum of eleven main bureaucratic reforms from 1660 to 1866 increased the costs of being corrupt among civil servants to an extent that exceeded their private benefits. Such historical lessons point to an ‘institutions matter’ model that may guide future anti-corruption efforts worldwide and probably lead to more social trust and socio-economic benefits.

The Government and the Prime Minister

The formation of Danish governments and their governance continues to be of interest both on their own and comparatively. Minority coalition governments are the norm in Denmark, increasing the importance of support parties for the government to pass its policies. Danish politics can increasingly be seen as two blocs: the ‘red’ bloc led by the Social Democrats and the ‘blue’ bloc led by the Liberals (although it was the Conservatives in the 1980s). This division may have increased the tendency of the presidentialization of Danish politics, not least with the prime minister’s increasing engagement in the day-to-day running of the government, especially with regard to foreign policy. Similarly, the minister of finance is ever more important as well for the day-to-day running of other departments. Ministerial turnover through reshuffles happens during the tenure of most governments, but portfolio redesign mostly occurs when governments are formed. The distribution of portfolios is proportional, but there is much variation in which portfolios parties prefer, with some valuing importance over number of portfolios. Overall, the Danish government and prime minister is a well-researched area, although there is still significant scope for research innovation.

The Parliament (FOLKETINGET)

This chapter asks how powerful, professional, and trusted the Danish Parliament, Folketinget, is. Based on a rational institutional approach, the chapter analyses existing and newly collected data on parliamentary institutions, parliamentary activity, members of Parliament, and voters’ perception of Parliament. The analyses show that the Folketing is especially strong and active when it comes to controlling the government, whereas its elective power is limited. The professionalization is increasing in terms of resources and well-educated members, but the degree of sectorization in committee membership is decreasing, possibly lowering specialization within Parliament and parliamentary party groups. Generally, Danish citizens still trust the Folketing, but trust is decreasing to an extent where it is no longer evident that most citizens see the Folketing as a democratic legitimizing institution. The chapter concludes that the Folketing is relatively powerful, professional, and trusted compared to other parliaments, but it also highlights where the Folketing as well as Danish legislative studies face challenges.

Danish European Union Policies

This chapter examines Denmark’s different positions on European Union policies which vary in terms of the degree to which sovereignty has been transferred to the EU. Specifically, it traces trade policy (very high transfer), agricultural policy (high transfer), internal market (moderate transfer), and opt-outs (low transfer) diachronically to illuminate the extent to which positions have changed over time and the underlying factors behind these changes. While the level of politicization varies between the policy areas, and party political differences play a role, the general picture that emerges is interest based. According to this approach, Denmark is positive towards giving up sovereignty regarding policies it benefits from economically, while it is more reluctant towards policies involving the transfer of sovereignty and money that are not offset by net economic benefits. In this chapter, this is demonstrated through an analysis stretching back to the decades before Danish membership to the European Union. Denmark also seems to change policy positions when the economic benefits for the country changes, as seen in the case of the Common Agricultural Policy.

Polity, Politics, and Policies

This final chapter wraps up some of the conclusions and provides some afterthoughts. The Constitution and the Community of the Realm (Denmark, Greenland, and the Faroe Islands) have demonstrated stability over the years and yet allowed for flexible adaptation. The political institutions, such as the Parliament and the administration, are well-functioning although increasing distrust has been a problem, even though trust is now on the rise again. The party system has shown continuity over time in spite of disruptions. The old parties still dominate Parliament as well as minority governments. However, a declining membership base means that parties increasingly lack bottom-up legitimacy. A specific characteristic of Danish politics is the local and regional governmental sectors, which is one of the biggest in the world. The policy section put a critical spotlight on Denmark’s position vis-à-vis the outside world. Since Denmark became a small state in 1864, it has been a story of continuous adaptation to the strongest power of relevance. The welfare state policies include relatively market-accommodating economic, business, and labour market policies, which are necessary in order to fund the welfare state as well as very costly environmental and climate policies.

Health Policy

Danish health policy is dominated by a national health service that combines a tax-financed universal health insurance with healthcare delivery through public hospitals and primary care physicians operating in private practices. This basic structure has been stable for almost half a century and is likely to remain so due to a strong consensus among voters and the political parties about the public system. Underneath the wide consensus, however, there is a ‘submerged’ political conflict and party competition between the left and the right about the degree to which the public healthcare system should use private providers and marketized patient rights. In part because of party competition and strong patient rights, there has been a significant drive towards higher total health costs over the past two decades. The Danish healthcare system is thus hardly challenged from political contestation since few politicians would dare to propose a real alternative. Nonetheless, the healthcare system is challenged by structural factors similar to what other countries face, such as an ageing population, as well as difficulties in controlling costs related to both pharmaceuticals and a scarce supply of healthcare professionals.

In War and Peace

Military activism is a defining characteristic of Denmark’s security and defence policy. This policy reflects the combination of increased international demand for military engagement since the end of the Cold War and the ability and willingness of Danish decision-makers to meet this demand. Danish willingness is the result of a merger of two distinct Danish perspectives on the aims and means of security and defence policy of a small state, one focused on the short-term military defence of the country, the other on long-term diplomatic efforts at creating a more peaceful international order. In the eyes of Danish decision-makers, a changed security order after the Cold War collapsed the distinction between the two perspectives. They saw military activism as a route to short-term security as well as a more peaceful order in the future. Consequently, they reformed the Danish armed forces, giving up territorial defence in favour of expeditionary forces. However, defence expenditure remains well below the 2 per cent NATO threshold for the near future.

Why a Book on Danish Politics?

Danish politics is comparable to the politics of other small European states. However, it is also unique because of its many years of minority governments, its history of EU opt-outs, its high electoral turnout even in local elections, and its high level of trust in government and Parliament. Other remarkable features are high female labour participation in spite of a lack of proactive gender policies, and one of the world’s largest local and regional government sectors. Denmark had its earthquake election as early as 1973 with many new parties entering Parliament. However, the June 2019 elections still saw the huge majority of voters voting for old parties. Denmark is also known as a country with a high taxation level and one of the world’s biggest publicly funded service sectors, possibly because minority governments strive for majority support for their legislative proposals. Other specific characteristics are the mix of market-oriented policies and the huge welfare state. These topics—and many more—are presented, analysed, and discussed in the book. The intention has been that the chapters should reflect the state-of-the-art in research on the various topics and simultaneously provide new knowledge and suggest future lines of research.

Electoral Turnout

Turnout in Denmark is high and stable in local as well as in national elections. A strong sense of voting as a duty nursed in primary schools and by civil society, early mobilization of the popular right, effective automatic voter registration, and many social traditions supporting whom to vote with contribute to explaining the high and stable turnout pattern. Nevertheless, there are substantial inequalities in turnout in Denmark. In particular, immigrants from non-Western countries and the unemployed have low turnout. The many recent Get-Out-The-Vote experiments in Denmark have increased turnout not only through their direct effect but also through a general increase in public awareness of participating in an election. The experiments had the largest impact on the low-propensity voters and thus contribute to decreased inequalities in turnout. Despite mobilization of especially young voters, large inequalities remain in turnout across specific groups in Denmark in national as well as local elections.