Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality Criteria for Democracy. Why Responsiveness is not the Key

  • Chapter
Regression of Democracy?

Abstract

Responsiveness, a basic principle of democracy, its relevance as well as our understanding of it are examined and widely discussed. There are two reasons for this choice. Firstly, the quality of democracy and with it the regression of democracy are often linked to responsiveness in public debates. Secondly, by such examination, we are considering crucial definitions of democracy, which have given direction to research into Comparative Democracy (Dahl, Lijphart). In both discussions, it is often ignored that the quality of democracy also reveals itself via the criterion for responsibility. This can come into conflict with the responsiveness criterion. Which then are the criteria necessary to solve the conflict in terms of democratic quality? Moreover, it should be discussed in how far the responsiveness criterion – despite its undisputed relevance – is of limited suitability in making democratic quality accessible. Put another way, under what circumstances can responsiveness (or its related procedures) be a suitable criterion for determining the quality of a democracy? Does a lower degree of responsiveness always indicate a loss of democratic quality? To structure this discussion the article reflects fundamental issues of conceptualizing democracy at the beginning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 37.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Alexy, Robert (1998) ‘Die Institutionalisierung der Menschenrechte im demokratischen Verfassungsstaat‘ in Gosepath, Stefan/Lohmann, Georg (eds.) Philosophie der Menschenrechte, Frankfurt/ Main: 244–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth (1951): Social Choice and Individual Values, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, David (1994) ‘Key Principles and Indices for a Democratic Audit’ in Beetham, David (ed.) Defining and Measuring Democracy, London: 25–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, David (1996) ‚The Democratic Audit: Grundprinzipien und Schlüsselindikatoren politischer Demokratie‘ in Campbell, David F.J./Liebhart, Karin/Martinsen,, Renate/Schaller, Christian/Schedler, Andreas (eds.) Die Qualität der österreichischen Demokratie. Versuche einer Annäherung, Wien: 19–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benz, Arthur (2003) ‘Föderalismus und Demokratie. Eine Untersuchung zum Zusammenwirken zweier Verfassungsprinzipien’; polis 57 FernUniversität Hagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betz, Joachim/Erdmann, Gero/Köllner, Patrick (2004) Die gesellschaftliche Verankerung politischer Parteien. Formale und informelle Dimensionen im internationalen Vergleich, Wiesbaden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohman, James/Rehg, William (Hrsg.) (1997) Deliberative Democracy. Essays on Reason and Politics, Cambridge/Mass./London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, Andrew (2003) ‘Necessary and Sufficient Conditions’, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/necessary-sufficient/.

  • Bühlmann, Marc/Merkel, Wolfgang/Müller, Lisa/Wessels, Bernhard (2008) ‘Quality of Democracy. Democracy Barometer for Established Democracies. Working Paper No. 10a:’,National Center for Competence in Reaserach -Democracy, Universität Zürich und WZB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conzelmann, Thomas (2003) ‘Auf der Suche nach einem Phänomen: Was bedeutet Good Governance in der europäischen Entwicklungspolitik?’, Nord -Süd aktuell 3: 468–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croissant, Aurel/Thiery, Peter (2000) ‘Defekte Demokratie. Konzept, Operationalisierung und Messung‘ in Lauth, Hans-Joachim/Pickel, Gert/Welzel, Christian (eds.) Demokratiemessung, Opladen: 89–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, Colin (2008) Postdemokratie,Frankfurt/Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A. (1971) Polyarchy. Participation and Opposition, New Haven/London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A. (1989) Democracy and its Critics, New Haven/London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, Larry/Morlino, Leonardo (2004) ‘The Quality of Democracy. An Overview’, Journal of Democracy 4: 14–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, Larry/Morlino, Leonardo (eds.) (2005) Assessing the Quality of Democracy, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, Anthony (1968) Ökonomische Theory der Demokratie, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, John S. (2002) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faust, Jörg (2007) ‘Democracy's Dividend: Political Order and Economic Productivity’, World Political Science Review 2: Article 2. DOI: 10.2202/1935-6226.1019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greven, Michael (1993) ‘Ist die Demokratie modern? Zur Rationalitätskrise der politischen Gesellschaft‘, Politische Vierteljahresschrift 3: 399–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guggenberger, Bernd/Offe, Claus (eds.) (1984) An den Grenzen der Mehrheitsdemokratie, Opladen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen (1992) ‘Drei normative Modelle der Demokratie: Zum Begriff deliberativer Politik‘ in Münkler, Herfried (ed.) Die Chancen der Freiheit, München/Zürich: 11–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen (1996) ‘Über den internen Zusammenhang von Rechtsstaat und Demokratie‘ in Habermas, Jürgen (ed.) Die Einbeziehung des Anderen. Studien zur politischen Theorie, Frankfurt/Main: 293–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadenius, Axel (1992) Democracy and Development, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, David (ed.) (1987) Models of Democracy, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Héretier, Adrienne (ed.) (1993): Policy-Analyse. Kritik und Neuorientierung (PVS-Sonderband 24), Opladen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Höffe, Otfried (1999) ‘Wieviel Politik ist dem Verfassungsgericht erlaubt?‘, Der Staat 2: 171–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, Stephen (1995) ‘Constitutionalism’ in Lipset, Seymour M. (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Democracy, London: 299–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauth, Hans-Joachim (2004) Demokratie und Demokratiemessung. Eine konzeptionelle Grundlegung für den interkulturellen Vergleich, Wiesbaden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauth, Hans-Joachim (2008) ‘Qualität und Konsolidierung der Demokratie im Osten Europas’, Zeitschrift für Staats-und Europawissenschaften1: 101–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauth, Hans-Joachim/Pickel, Gert/Welzel, Christian (eds.) (2000) Demokratiemessung. Konzepte und Befunde im internationalen Vergleich, Wiesbaden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend (1984) Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-one Countries, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, Seymour M./Rokkan, Stein (eds.) (1967): Party Systems and Voter Alignments, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, Seymour M. (1959) ‘Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Develop¬ment and Political Legitimacy’, American Political Science Review 1: 69–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, Niklas (1984) Soziale Systeme. Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie, Frankfurt/Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maihold, Günter (1996) ‘”Erblinden” die Institutionen und versagen die Akteure? Regierbarkeit und Zukunftsfähigkeit der Demokratie in Lateinamerika‘ in Bodemer, Klaus/Krumwiede, Heinrich-W./Nolte, Detlef/Sangmeister, Hartmut (eds.) Lateinamerika Jahrbuch 1996, Frankfurt/Main: 62–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayntz, Renate (1997) ‘Politische Steuerung und gesellschaftliche Steuerungsprobleme’ in Mayntz, Renate (ed.) Soziale Dynamik und politische Steuerung, Frankfurt/Main: 186–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, Wolfgang/Puhle, Hans-Jürgen/Croissant, Aurel/Eicher, Claudia/Thiery, Peter (2003) Defekte Demokratien, Bd. 1: Theorie, Opladen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muno, Wolfgang (2001) ‘Demokratie und Entwicklung’, Institut für Politikwissenschaft, Abt. politische Auslandsstudien und Entwicklungspolitik, Dokumente und Materialien 29, Mainz.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Donnell, Guillermo/Cullell, Jorge V./Iazzetta, Osvaldo M. (eds.) (2004): The Quality of Democracy, Notre Dame.

    Google Scholar 

  • Offe, Claus (1994) Der Tunnel am Ende des Lichts: Erkundungen der politischen Transformation im Neuen Osten, Frankfurt/Main/New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Offe, Claus (1996) ‘Bewährungsproben – Über einige Beweislasten bei der Verteidigung der liberalen Demokratie’ in Weidenfeld, Werner (eds.) Demokratie am Wendepunkt, Berlin: 141–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. Bingham (2005) ‘The Chain of Responsiveness’ in Diamond, Larry/Morlino, Leonardo (eds.) Assessing the Quality of Democracy, Baltimore: 62–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, Adam (1988) ‘Democracy as a Contingent Outcome of Conflicts’ in Elster, Jon/Slagstad, Rume (eds.) Constitutionalism and Democracy, Cambridge: 59–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, Adam/Alvarez, Michael M./Cheibub, Jose Antonio/Limongi Neto, Fernando Papaterra (1996) ‘What makes Democracies Endure’, Journal of Democracy 1: 39–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisinger, William M. (1997) ‘Choices Facing the Builders of a Liberal Democracy’ in Grey, Robert D. (ed.) Democratic Theory and Post-Communist Change, Englewood Cliffs/NJ: 24–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, William H. (1980) ‘A Reply to Ordeshook and Rae’, American Political Science Review 2: 456–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, Giovanni (1970) ‘Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics’, American Political Science Review 4: 1033–1053.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saward, Michael 1994 ‘Democratic Theory and Indices of Democratization’ in Beetham, David (ed.) Defining and Measuring Democracy, London: 6–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, Fritz W. (1970) Demokratietheorie zwischen Utopie und Anpassung, Konstanz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, Fritz W. (2000) Interaktionsformen. Akteurzentrierter Institutionalismus in der Politikforschung, Opladen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, Manfred G. (2006) Demokratietheorien. Eine Einführung, Wiesbaden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, Manfred G. (1995) Demokratietheorien. Eine Einführung, Opladen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, Manfred G. (1997): ‘Komplexität und Demokratie. Ergebnisse älterer und neuere Debatten’ in Klein, Ansgar/Schmalz-Bruns, Rainer (eds.) Politische Beteiligung und Bürgerengagement, Bonn: 41–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitter, Philippe C. (2004) ‘The Ambiguous Virtues of Accountability’ in Diamond, Larry/Morlino, Leonardo (eds.) Assessing the Quality of democracy, Baltimore: 18–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilke, Helmut (1992) Ironie des Staates. Grundlinien einer Staatstheorie polyzentrischer Gesellschaft, Frankfurt/Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zippelius, Reinhold (1991) Allgemeine Staatslehre, München.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Hans-Joachim Lauth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Gero Erdmann Marianne Kneuer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften ist eine Marke von Springer Fachmedien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lauth, HJ. (2011). Quality Criteria for Democracy. Why Responsiveness is not the Key. In: Erdmann, G., Kneuer, M. (eds) Regression of Democracy?. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93302-3_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation