Democratic Deficits in Comparison: Best (and Worst) Practices in European, US and Swiss Merger Regulation
Thomas D. Zweifel
Abstract
Thomas D. Zweifel
Abstract
Abstract Policy‐makers and scholars continue to express concerns that the EU suffers from a ‘democratic deficit’. But most democratic deficit arguments are not based on recent empirical research; and seeing the EU as sui generis, they fail to compare the EU to other polities. This article compares the European ‘regulatory state’ with two federal democracies, the United States and Switzerland, in recent merger regulation. Its main finding is that European merger regulation is less democratic than American, but more democratic than Swiss regulation. If the EU suffers from a democratic deficit, it is hardly alone.
OpenAlex reports 16 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract Policy‐makers and scholars continue to express concerns that the EU suffers from a ‘democratic deficit’. But most democratic deficit arguments are not based on recent empirical research; and seeing the EU as sui generis, they fail to compare the EU to other polities. This article compares the European ‘regulatory state’ with two federal democracies, the United States and Switzerland, in recent merger regulation. Its main finding is that European merger regulation is less democratic than American, but more democratic than Swiss regulation. If the EU suffers from a democratic deficit, it is hardly alone.
Key concepts: Democratic deficit, Democracy, Political science, State (computer science), European union, Political economy, Economics, Law