審議式超國家主義

Deliberative Supranationalism

盧倩儀(Chien-Yi Lu)

《問題與研究》 43卷6期 (2004/12) Pp. 53-71

https://doi.org/10.30390/ISC.200412_43(6).0003

摘要

民主赤字問題長久以來，始終是歐盟最主要;最迫切待解決的一項問題。近年來，部份學者建議歐盟應透過所謂「審議式超國家主義」(Deliberative Supranationalism)從民主赤字(Democratic Deficit)的兩難掙脫出來，因而引發一場論戰。亦有學者更精確地建議，歐盟應在審議式互動的原則下，透過其現存之委員會體系(Comitology)來提昇決策之民主內涵。究竟何為「審議式超國家主義」？歐盟委員會體系又是如何來實踐所謂的審議式超國家主義的？而審議式超國家主義的概念以及歐盟委員會體系真的能夠達到修補歐盟民主赤字問題的效果嗎？本文對於這些問題將逐一探討，指出審議式超國家主義作為一個補救歐盟民主赤字的超國家的民主概念，是極為可行並且正在發展當中的一種途徑。實證上，歐盟委員會體系為體現審議式超國家主義最具體而適切的一個例子。然而歐盟委員會體系雖然在本質上既是超國家，也極端重視審議式的互動，但卻依舊無法完全擺脫民主赤字的包袱。「歐洲公領域」的成長因此仍是未來歐盟補救民主赤字問題極為重要的一項要素。

關鍵字

歐盟 ； 審議式超國家主義 ； 民主赤字 ； 歐盟委員會體系 ； 審議式民主

並列摘要

Democratic deficit has long been a pressing issue for the European Union (EU). Recently, a group of scholars have suggested to tackle the democratic deficit problem by promoting the concept of deliberative supranationalism, which led to a heated debate. More specifically, the unique way the EU comitology operates has been said to be the best illustration of deliberative supranationalism and has the potential of mending the democratic deficit problem. This article aims to answer the following questions: What is deliberative supranationalism? How is comitology an example of this newly invented concept? Will the concept of deliberative supranationalism and the practice of comitology indeed be effective remedies for the problem of democratic deficit? The article points out that deliberative supranationalism is a plausible research approach that may tackle the problem of democratic deficit effectively. Empirically, the EU comitology has made a strong case for deliberative supranationalism. Nevertheless, in the absence of a strong public, the EU comitology alone can not fill the gap between the European people and policy makers. More efforts are needed in forging a European public sphere.

並列關鍵字

European Union ； Deliberative Supranationalism ； Democratic Deficit ； Comitology ； Deliberative Democracy

參考文獻

Andersen, S. S.,Burns, T.(1996).The European Union: How Democr atic Is It?.London, U. K.:Sage.

Andersen, S. S.,Eliassen, K. A.(1996).The European Union: How Democratic Is It?.London, U. K.:Sage.

Cohen, J.,Sabel, C.(1997).Directly-Deliberative Polyarchy.European Law Journal.3(4),313-342.

Crombez, C.(2003).The Democratic Deficit in the European Union-Much Ado about Nothing?.European Union Politics.4(1),101-120.

Dahl, R. A.(1989).Democracy and its Critics.New Haven, Conn.:Yale University Press.