The Danes and Europe: From EC 1972 to Euro 2000 – Elections, Referendums and Attitudes

Within Europe, the Danish electorate is the one that has most often expressed its opinion about the European Union in elections and in national referendums. Votes and attitudes are analysed for the five elections to the European Parliament between 1979 and 1999 and in the six referendums – from the first on membership of the EC in 1972 to the September 2000 referendum on acceptance of the euro, the European single currency. The article gives an overview of the development of Danish public opinion in relation to the European Union from 1960 to 2000, the turnouts at referendums, and the elections and results for the European Parliament. It is shown that since Denmark joined the EU, public opinion has fluctuated greatly, although the balance among Danish European Parliament members has remained stable. The reasons for the frequent use of referendums in Denmark and a thematic outline of the six referendums are put forward. The article concludes with a comprehensive analysis of public attitudes towards the referendum on the euro in 2000. It is shown that regional electoral patterns have vanished, but underlying attitudes are manifested in the public.     

Settlements in corporate bribery cases: an illusion of choice?

European Journal of Law and Economics - Despite prosecutors’ difficulties in proving corporate bribery, nearly all enforcement actions end with a settlement at the pretrial stage. Compared to...     

The Impact of a Break-Through Rule on European Firms

We analyze the impact of a 75 pct. Break-Through rule on 1,035 European firms with dual class shares. In 3–5 pct. of the firms the controlling owners incur a direct loss of control, while in another 11–17 pct. of the firms, the controlling owners are likely to incur a loss of control. Firms in Germany, Italy and the Scandinavian countries are more likely to incur a loss of control. The restrictions that the Break-Through rule put on the ability of these firms to issue new shares to outsiders without changing the control structure are also estimated. We conclude that a significant number of firms with dual class shares in the European Union will be affected by a 75 pct. Break-Through rule.     

What Mr. Spock told the earthlings: the aims of political philosophy,action-guidingness and fact-dependency

Abstract

Recently, G. A. Cohen introduced an influential distinction between fact-sensitive and fact-insensitive principles arguing that all basic normative principles are of the latter type. David Miller rejects this claim submitting that the validity of basic normative political principles depends on some general propositions about human nature and societies; for example, that men’s generosity is ‘confined’ and that nature has made ‘scanty provision’ for his wants. Miller ties this view of the nature of basic political principles to the view that political philosophy ought to guide people engaged in real-world politics and claims plausibly that in order to fulfil this purpose, political philosophy must be informed by social science. I argue that Miller neither succeeds in showing that basic principles can be fact-sensitive, nor establishes any connection between the Cohen-Miller disagreement on fact-sensitivity, on the one hand, and the nature and aims of political philosophy, on the other hand.     

Negative Campaigning in a Multiparty System

Research in political campaigning in Scandinavian countries is inadequate, and research in negative campaigning is entirely non‐existent. A ‘negative campaign message’ is defined as an explicit critique of the political opponent. Applying this definition to the 2005 Danish election indicates that negative campaigning comprises a very limited aspect of the political campaigning in the course of this election. The opposition tends to employ negative tactics the most in their attempts to establish their political platform. The media provided extensive coverage to the few negative campaign messages, thus presenting a biased sense of the political campaign to the general public. This biased media coverage encourages parties to ‘go negative’ in their respective campaigns in the battle for media attention.     

Deliberative Democracy and the Deliberative Poll on the Euro

Focus on the concept of deliberative democracy has increased rapidly within recent decades. However, the concept is weakly defined, if at all. 'Deliberation' is defined as an unconstrained exchange of arguments that involves practical reasoning and potentially leads to a transformation of preferences. Throughout the 1990s several innovative democratic experiments have flourished focusing on citizens' involvement and deliberation. The Deliberative Poll in focus here is, according to many parameters, the most ambitious one. The article presents the results from the Danish National Deliberative Poll on the single currency. In August 2000, 364 repres-entative Danish citizens assembled to deliberate on Denmark's participation in the single currency. The Deliberative Poll is described as a quasi-experiment set out to explore the empirical potentials of deliberative democracy. The focus is whether the claimed potential of deliberative democracy is present in the experimental setting. The participants' answers reflect a deliberative process dominated by considerable changes in opinion, an increase in knowledge and an improved ability to form a reasoned opinion. Mutual understanding among the participants prevailed. At the same time, self-interest and domination were also part of the deliberative process. Thus, this article encourages the development of deliberative democratic theory in order to incorporate these features of politics.     

The Sophisticated Public: The Effect of Competing Frames on Public Opinion

Deliberation is the current buzzword among democratic thinkers. Deliberative democracy assumes that deliberation has an effect on the people engaging in the deliberative process. Several studies have demonstrated that this is indeed the case: deliberation increases political knowledge and opinion consistency, as well as mutual understanding and broader tolerance among citizens. In order to verify the findings from these studies and to confront the problems of internal and external validity in the previous studies of deliberation, alternative methodological designs must be applied. Applying an experimental split-sample design using CATI on the Danish electorate reveals how arguments and frames influence public opinion. Across various frames and arguments and political issues, positive (negative) arguments tend to push opinions in a positive (negative) direction. When competing frames are presented to the public, people submit to neither ambivalence nor non-attitudes. Quite to the contrary, people tend to follow their predisposition and provide more consistent opinions. Thus, deliberation composed of various competing frames and arguments facilitates – rather than distorts – sophisticated and considered public opinion.     

Power struggles in policy feedback processes: incremental steps towards a circular economy within Dutch wastewater policy

Policy Sciences - Environmental problems are usually not tackled with path-departing policies but rather with incrementally adjusted or unchanged policies. One way to address incremental change is...     

Dispositional neutrality and minority rights

Alan Patten defends a novel principle of neutrality according to which the state must accommodate all conceptions of the good equally. This principle rests on the claim that the state must be equally responsive to the interests of all citizens. I introduce a competing principle – neutrality of disposition – according to which the state must be disposed to treat citizens with different conceptions of the good alike in relevantly similar situations. The requirement of the equal responsiveness of the state is neutral between these two conceptions of neutrality. Moreover, neutrality of disposition, unlike neutrality of treatment, is compatible with a plausible luck egalitarian view of cultural justice according to which justice requires the state to be more accommodating of some conceptions of the good than of others in situations where not being so will result in members of minority cultures being worse off than others through no responsibility of their own.