ASTK12160U CANCELED - Constitutional Features of European State Politics

Volume 2013/2014
Content

This course introduces students of political science and public administration to the intricacies past and current institutional designs particularly in Europe and to a lesser degree in the rest of the world. The main focus is on the way national polities are structured, the implications this has for the political developments in the respective system and how political researchers approach the analysis of these systems. The course does not adopt a country by country analysis but rather concentrates on the institutional features themselves and only examines countries where these are prominent. This approach is sure to introduce students to the full spectrum of existing institutional mechanisms around the continent and the way European systems behave as a consequence of their distinct institutional apparatuses.

The course follows the structure bellow:

  1. Introduction
  2. Historical Institutionalism
  3. Rational Choice Institutionalism and Sociological Institutionalism
  4. Polybius and the Roman Republic
  5. Federalism and unitarism (Spain, Germany)
  6. Semi- Presidentialism, Parliamentarism (France)
  7. Unicameralism (Denmark, Sweden)
  8. Bicameralism (UK, Morroco)
  9. Constitutional Courts
  10. Small States
  11. Constitutional Monarchies
  12. State religion (France, Denmark, Turkey)
  13. Party systems
  14. Electoral Systems

 

The course starts by introducing students to the leading branches of the institutionalist approach, historical, rational choice and sociological institutionalisms. Following this students will be introduced the structure of the classic Roman republic. This polity is extremely important as it is the first one to demonstrate a balance of the executive, legislative and judicial powers and exhibits other constitutional features which are echoed by modern day European states. The subsequent session deals with the dichotomy of federal and unitary organization of the state and the consequences of this organization for the politics of the state. As an almost  immediate consequence of the federal or unitary constitution the students will be introduced to bi- and unitary parliaments. In these session particular attention will be devoted to the example of Denmark and its transition from a bicameral to unicameral parliament in 1953. Subsequently attention will be directed towards the Semi-presidential, parliamentarian and constitutional monarchical models as these are the predominant models of state governance in Europe. The remainder of the course deals with the lesser constitutional features of national administrations e.g. parties and party systems, electoral systems, constitutional courts and state religion. One of the sessions also deals with the Vatican as an extreme case in the European constitutional landscape representing the last absolutist monarchy in Europe.

Learning Outcome

The objective of the course is to enable the students to:

  • Describe the decision-making capacities of a state, based on its institutional mechanisms.
  • Evaluate the most important factors, actors and events in a political system.
  • Utilize the theoretical approaches to interpret political developments.
  • Extrapolate the development of the political process based on an assessment of the actors involved in it, and their respective jurisdictions.
  • Categorize political systems based on their polities and applying this categorization to adjust expectations.
  • Juxtapose analogous political systems to identify relevant influences explicating diverging behavior.

Foreløbig litteraturliste:

Pierson, Paul, & Skocpol, Theda. (2002). Historical institutionalism in contemporary political science.
Political science: The state of the discipline, 3.

Steinmo, Sven. (2008). What is Historical institutionalism. Approaches in the social sciences, 150-178.

Thelen, Kathleen. (1999). Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annual review of political science, 2(1), 369-404.

Miller, Edward Alan, & Banaszak-Holl, Jane. (2005). Cognitive and Normative Determinants of State Policymaking Behavior: Lessons from the Sociological Institutionalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 35(2), 191-216.

Peters, B.G. (2005). Institutional Theory in Political Science: 2nd Edition: Bloomsbury.

Quackenbush, Stephen. (2004). The Rationality of Rational Choice Theory. International Interactions, 30(2), 87-107. doi: 10.1080/​03050620490462595

Rhodes,R.A.W., Binder, S.A., & Rockman, Bert A. (2008). The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions: OUP Oxford.

History, Book 6, Rome at the End of the Punic Wars, Constitution of the Roman Republic, Polybius, 

Lintott,A. W. (1999). The constitution of the Roman Republic. Oxford [England]; New York: Clarendon Press.

Bednar, Jenna, Eskridge Jr, William N, & Ferejohn, John. (2001). A political theory of federalism. Constitutional culture and democratic rule, 1-14.

Linder, Wolf, & Vatter, Adrian. (2001). Institutions and outcomes of Swiss federalism: The role of the cantons in Swiss politics. West European Politics, 24(2), 95-122.

Mayntz, Renate. (1999). Multi-level governance: German federalism and the European Union. Governing Beyond the Nation State. Global Public Policy, Regionalism, or Going Local, 101-114.

Page, E., & Goldsmith, M. (1987). Central and local government relations: a comparative analysis of West European unitary states: SAGE Publications.

Longley,L.D., & Olson, D.M. (1991). Two Into One: The Politics and Processes of National Legislative Cameral Change: Westview Press.

Worthwick, RL. (2001). Methods of composition of second chambers. Journal of Legislative Studies, 7(1), 19-26.

Patterson, Samuel C, & Mughan, Anthony. (2001). Fundamentals of Institutional Design: The Functions and Powers of Parliamentary Second Chambers. Journal of Legislative Studies, 7(1), 39-60.

Shell, Donald. (2001). The history of bicameralism. Journal of Legislative Studies, 7(1), 5-18.

Wheeler-Booth, Sir Michael. (2001). Procedure: A Case Study of the House of Lords. Journal of Legislative Studies, 7(1), 77-92.

Duverger, Maurice. (1980). A new political system model: semipresidential government. European Journal of Political Research, 8(2), 165-187.

Elgie, Robert. (1996). The French presidency: conceptualizing presidential power in the Fifth Republic. Public Administration, 74(2), 275-291.

Siaroff, Alan. (2003). Comparative presidencies: The inadequacy of the presidential, semipresidential and parliamentary distinction. European Journal of Political Research, 42(3), 287-312.

Stepan, Alfred, & Skach, Cindy. (1993). Constitutional frameworks and democratic consolidation: parliamentarianism versus presidentialism. World Politics, 46(01), 1-22.

Bogdanor, Vernon. (1995). The monarchy and the constitution: Clarendon Press Oxford.

Brazier, Rodney. (2007). Legislating about the Monarchy. Cambridge Law Journal, 66(1), 86.

Huntington, Samuel P. (1966). The Political Modernization of Traditional Monarchies. Daedalus, 763-788.

Yack, Bernard. (1980). The rationality of Hegel's concept of monarchy. The American Political Science Review, 709-720.

Comella, Victor Ferreres. (2003). Consequences of Centralizing Constitutional Review in a Special Court: Some Thoughts on Judicial Activism, The. Tex. L. Rev., 82, 1705.            

There are no prerequisites necessary for course participation. All students from the Bachelor and Master level who would like to expand their understanding of the wider European constitutional context are welcome.
The course will be mainly based on lectures, 10 minutes student presentations, class discussions, small group exercises and guest lectures.
  • Category
  • Hours
  • Class Instruction
  • 28
  • Exam
  • 79
  • Preparation
  • 168
  • Total
  • 275
Credit
10 ECTS
Type of assessment
Oral examination
An oral exam based on a synopsis written by the student
Marking scale
7-point grading scale
Censorship form
External censorship
Criteria for exam assesment

Criteria for achieving the goals:

  • Grade 12 is given for an outstanding performance: the student lives up to the course’s goal description in an independent and convincing manner with no or few and minor shortcomings
  • Grade 7 given for a good performance: the student is confidently able to live up to the goal description, albeit with several shortcomings
  • Grade 02 is given for an adequate performance: the minimum acceptable performance in which the student is only able to live up to the goal description in an insecure and incomplete manner.’