The Rise of the Unelected

Vibert, Frank

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511491160

Cited by 331 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We have indicated that the member states had different understandings of the policy implications of subsidiarity, but they also had conflicting conceptions about regional institutions and administrations, owing to the competing ideas of federalism versus inter-governmentalism, nationalism versus regionalism, and governance by governments versus governance by unelected arm's-length bodies (Vibert 2007). However, they all shared a common interest in making the increasing supranational EU competence more palatable and more democratic legitimate for their respective populaces.…”

Section: Making the Eu Competence More Democratic Through Subsidiaritymentioning

confidence: 94%

The Regulatory State: How Democratic?

Veggeland¹

2012

jmr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The principle of subsidiarity was formally introduced as a principle of intention in the 1991 Treaty of Maastricht that recognized the devolution of competence, i.e., 'decision-making to be performed at the lowest possible effective administrative level' in the European multi-level system of governance. The rhetoric deployed on behalf of the principle of subsidiarity elaborated it and strongly suggested that it was, as it were, a principle of 'nearness' to the people, implying a more bottom-up form of governance and a more democratic mean of voicing opinions. But in what kind of framework should 'nearness' take place? Should it take place within the framework of the devolution of competence to elected national assemblies and the emancipation of constituencies? Or should it be applied within the framework of the regulatory stat that makes use of national and international arm's-length agencies and other governmental bodies in its governance approach? The paper gives answers to these questions, and examines how different approaches to the concept of democracy transform governance structures.

show abstract

Section: Making the Eu Competence More Democratic Through Subsidiaritymentioning

confidence: 94%

The Regulatory State: How Democratic?

Veggeland¹

2012

jmr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is influenced by the pluralist school of thought, according to which plural elites co-exist in largely separate spheres of society (Dahl 1961;Putnam 1977). The weakening of centralized political control is a concern of some authors writing in this vein (Peters & Pierre 2004;Dahlström et al 2011), while others take a more benign view of the effects of limiting majoritarian institutions (Vibert 2007;Cornell & Lapuente 2014). Professional pluralism is the version of pluralism most relevant to the Icelandic case, according to recent theorizing on the subject.…”

Section: Three Power Structure Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Icelandic power structure revisited

Kristinsson¹

2018

irpa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political scientists have developed three main interpretations of the Icelandic power structure -namely, traditional elitism, competitive elitism and professional pluralism. These can be seen to some extent as successive regimes, with traditional elitism prevalent in the nineteenth century, competitive elitism for much of the twentieth century and professional pluralism in more recent decades. However, their relative strength at different times, and the extent to which they still predominate, remains uncertain. This article evaluates how the different models reflect on the position of the political elite over time and how helpful they are in understanding contemporary power structures. Data on the composition of the political elite on one hand, and eight contemporary elite groups on the other are analysed in order to evaluate elite openness, elite selection and network patterns. The results provide support for conventional interpretations, in that competitive elitism replaced traditional elitism in important respects during the twentieth century, but has itself been replaced in many respects by professional pluralism. Accordingly, professional pluralism is characteristic of the contemporary power structure, with relatively open access to elite groups, strong influence of meritocratic and professional criteria and network patterns which are concentrated within, rather than across, spheres of influence. Remnants of traditional elite privilege and competitive elitism, where political parties play a central role, can be found in a number of areas, and professional pluralism has important elitist features.

show abstract

“…Modern democracy relies not only on the principle of popular sovereignty but also on a set of independent institutions, which are neither directly elected nor controlled by "we, the people". 26 These unelected institutions are crucial because they enhance horizontal accountability and can oppose decisions taken by majority rule if these go against the liberal democratic pillar. Therefore, we should expect that these institutions will play a crucial role when it comes to striking down policies adopted by populists in power.…”

Section: Actorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with populists in government: a framework for analysis

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing research on populist actors and their impact on the democratic system, but little has been written on how to deal with populist actors in government. To respond to this question, in this article we develop a theoretical framework that distinguishes three levels of analysis. First, we identify the set of domestic and external actors that can try to cope with the coming into power of populist forces. Second, we offer an overview of the different strategies that can be employed to react against populist actors in government. Third, we argue that it is important to consider the timing of the reactions. In addition, we also present a brief summary of the articles that are part of this special issue.

show abstract

The Rise of the Unelected

Cited by 331 publications

References 0 publications

The Regulatory State: How Democratic?

The Regulatory State: How Democratic?

The Icelandic power structure revisited

Dealing with populists in government: a framework for analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About