Civil society participation and EU democracy: Lessons from research - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Civil society participation and EU democracy: Lessons from research

Thomas Persson, Associate Professor

• Dept. of Government

Uppsala University E-mail: thomas.persson@statsvet.uu.se

Civil Society Day, 6 March 2013

The EU’s democratic deficit

• Less than half of European citizens are

satisfied with democracy in the EU.

Civil Society Day 2013 Source: Eurobarometer

Figure 1. Satisfied with democracy in the EU (average)

Political representation in the EU

Civil Society Day 2013

• Three forms of representation in the Union

Figure 2. Three strategies for strengthening democracy in the EU

Participatory governance

• White Paper on European Governance

– “…open up the policy-making process [in order] to get more people and organisations involved in shaping and delivering EU policy” (COM 2001)

• More involvement of civil society – the way

forward?

– …an effective means for enhancing the democratic quality of EU policies and increasing the problem-solving capacity of the Union. – …serve sooner to deepen than to alleviate the Union’s problems with democracy and efficiency.

Civil Society Day 2013

REACH – an early test

• The new regulatory system for chemicals,

REACH, an early test of the participatory- governance strategy

– “…[b]lue print for participatory law-making more generally” (Heyvaert 2008:198) – “…it reinstalled key players in a veto position and did little to enhance effective participation of the public” (Pesendorfer 2006:111)

• Data from an expert survey with more than

600 respondents from over 40 countries

Civil Society Day 2013

Six conditions for democratic EU policy-making

• 1. The organisations involved in EU policy-making

accurately represent the views of their members.

• 2. Political cleavages in the Union are functional rather

than territorial.

• 3. All interests enjoy equal and adequate

representation in EU policy-making fora.

• 4. All interests have equal and adequate access to

relevant information.

• 5. All interests have an equal and adequate influence
• n policy.
• 6. Broad access to information and policy-making fora

does not interfere with decision-making efficiency.

Functional or territorial political cleavages?

Civil Society Day 2013

Figure 3. Confidence-interval plot for position on REACH by country

AU GE IR TC IT UK BE NE FR SP CC LU FI PO SW GR DE .2 .4 .6 .8 1 Support for regulations

Notes: AU=Austria, GE=Germany, IR=Ireland, TC=Third country, IT=Italy, UK=United Kingdom, BE=Belgium, NE=Netherlands, FR=France, SP=Spain, CC=Candidate Country, LU=Luxembourg, FI=Finland, PO=Portugal, SW=Sweden, GR=Greece, DE=Denmark.

Civil Society Day 2013

Functional or territorial political cleavages?

IA TCG PB IO EP MSG EC UN OEU APC CO NGO AC .2 .4 .6 .8 1 Support for regulations

Notes: IA=Industry Association, TCG=Third-Country Government, PB=Private Business, IO=International Organisation, EP=European Parliament, MSG=Member state governments, EC=European Commission, UN=Trade Union, OEU=Other EU Institutions, APC=Applicant-Country Government, CO=European Council, NGO=Non-Governmental Organisation, AC=Academic and Technical Institute.

Figure 4. Confidence-interval plot for position on REACH by organisational affiliation

Civil Society Day 2013

Functional or territorial political cleavages?

ANI INI COI GEI WOI HEI ENI −.2 .2 .4 .6 .8 Support for regulations

Figure 5. Confidence-interval plot for position on REACH by interest affiliation

Notes: ANI=Animal Interests, INI=Industrial Interests, COI=Consumer Interests, GEI=General Interests, WOI=Worker Interests, HEI=Health Interests, ENI=Environmental Interests.

Effective participation and access to information

• REACH process reasonably open, inclusive

and transparent.

– Involved actors had opportunities to make their voices heard and had access to information.

• Not equal opportunities to participate or to

scrutinise the activities of EU institutions.

– Industrial interests seem to have an advantage, albeit a small one, over more diffuse interests.

Equal influence among associations?

Civil Society Day 2013

Figure 6. Confidence-interval plot for the influence of various organisations

Notes: EC=The Commission, CO=The Council, IA=Industry Associations, EP=The Parliament, MSG= Member-state Governments, NGO=Non-Governmental Organisations, PB=Private Businesses, OEU=Other EU Institutions, UN=Trade Unions, IO=International Organisations, AC=Academic Institute, APC= Applicant-Country Governments, TCG= Third-Country Governments.

Equal influence among interests?

Civil Society Day 2013

Figure 7. Confidence-interval plot for the influence of various interests

Notes: INI=Industrial interests, ENI=Environmental interests, HEI=Health interests, ANI=Animal interests, COI=Consumer interests, WOI=Worker interests, GEI=General interests, PRI=Private interests.

Relation between input and output legitimacy

Civil Society Day 2013

Figure 8. Relationship between input- and output legitimacy

2 4 6 8 Outputlegitimitet 2 4 6 8 Inputlegitimitet

Conclusions

• Civil society involvement may improve

democratic representation.

– Provides citizens with better means for affecting EU policy. – Possible to promote broad participation without undermining the Union’s problem-solving capacity.

• Civil society participation may increase

political inequality;

– Some groups have a better chance of influencing policy than others.

Civil Society Day 2013

Conclusions

• Civil society participation not an alternative

to the territorial and electoral channels of representation – rather a complement.

• Participatory governance reforms not the

solution to the EU’s legitimacy crisis, but can reduce the breadth and depth of the crisis…

Civil Society Day 2013

Further reading…

Civil Society Day 2013