Although much has been written about the general relationship between democracy and development since the end of the Second World War, a common consensus has not emerged to explain the various facets of this relationship. Originally defined in purely economic terms, only recently has the concept of development been broadened to include the most vital non-economic components under the umbrella of 'human development'. Indeed, the UNDP's first Human Development Report (1990) proposed that human development should serve as the yardstick with which to measure the progress of nations. Influenced by the post-Cold War euphoria, the accompanying political argument, propagated by many international bodies (including the World Bank and the UNDP), Western policy-makers and development planners, held that democracy and human development are mutually complementary phenomena. To date, however, the empirical basis for this view has not been established. Using data from 123 countries for the 1970-90 period, this thesis represents an extensive cross-national, time-series investigation into the nature of the relationship between democracy and human development. It will be argued that there are in fact two relationships to be established, one between democracy and levels of human development and one between democracy and human development performance. This leads to the fundamental question: Is democracy typically the by-product of development, the catalyst for development, or neither. To answer this, the records of democratic and non-democratic states will be evaluated and compared using many different analytical techniques, sample groups and controlling variables. This thesis will also examine other important related concerns, including the triangular relationship between democracy, human development and economic growth, and the political basis of the best-performing case studies, or 'developmental states'. Several new empirical measures have been constructed specifically for the purposes of this research, including a new measure of democracy, the Level of Democracy index (LoD), and a new and more comprehensive measure of human development, the Integrated Human Development Index (I-HDI).

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The term 'democratic deficit' often masks an unjustified presupposition that the EU should follow similar democratic practices to those found in national arenas. Attempts to replicate national democratic Institutions tend to lead to unsatisfactory solutions at the EU level. A legitimate and democratic Union may involve innovations for which there are no precedents in national experiences of democratic politics. In effect, this Thesis, "New Stories on the European Union's democratic deficit" reviews a range of theoretical discussions on democracy, legitimacy and European integration and suggests how these might be useful in framing practical proposals for institutional change at the EU level. These proposals envisage at the future direction and development of the EU towards a substantially democratic and legitimate Euro-polity under the conceptual and theoretical framework of a meta-national democracy. The term meta-national suggests from the very beginning that the EU is not a State or a Super-State, and consequently its democratic dimensions should be judged at a different level, the European one. Under this concept, the Thesis further proceeds with analysing the fundamental issues of a growing democracy which consists of: 1) a system of multi-level governance, and not a government; 2) an autochthonous civic-value driven demos; 3) channels of civic and political participation at all levels, individual and collective; 4) elements of EU constitutionalism; 5) an on-going process of accountability; 6) a constructive process of transparency and openness. This is only an indicative list of the many elements that can be generally attributed to the Union's continuing and growing democracy. They have particularly been selected as they involve recent changes and are currently supported by the White Paper on European Governance which in setting in motion a reform process responds to the author's expectations developed under the theoretical framework of a meta-national democracy. Finally, under that same conceptual framework, the Thesis comes to the conclusion that the EU is democratic and enjoys legitimacy. By opening up the policy-making process to enable more people and civil society organisations to become actively involved in the shaping and delivering of EU policies, it offers real opportunities for deliberation and participation. Patterns of access and interwoven levels indicate the existence of a system of multi-level governance which in turn embraces the notion of a `polity'. It promotes a new understanding of a European demos (a politically organised people) which is not based on ethno-national and cultural affinities but rather on commonly shared civic values. In terms of assuring a high degree of popular legitimacy, it provides for a Bill of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which neatly combines the constitutional structure, based in the founding Treaties and the national constitutions of the EU Member States. It elevates openness and transparency to fundamental principles of Community law, yet, being of a nascent constitutional character. Lastly, it promotes greater accountability and responsibility for those involved in the legislative and executive processes of the EU policy- making.

No description available.