How Trickle‐Down Democracy Won the Debate, and Why It Didn’t Have To

Jan Pieter Beetz, Gilles Pittoors and Wouter Wolfs
Additional contact information
Jan Pieter Beetz: Utrecht School of Governance, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Gilles Pittoors: Department of Political Science, KU Leuven, Belgium
Wouter Wolfs: Centre for European Studies, KU Leuven, Belgium

Politics and Governance, 2025, vol. 13

Abstract: Pro‐EU MEPs pursue a strategy to further democratise EU governance through initiatives such as the Spitzenkandidaten and transnational lists. Doing so, they seem to follow a logic of what we call “trickle‐down democracy,” which entails the belief that the reproduction of domestic representative democracy at the EU level will increase popular support for the EU. However, despite extensive increases in power and authority for Parliament, popular support has not significantly increased, while Euroscepticism has become a mainstream phenomenon. When did pro‐EU MEPs commit to a “trickle‐down” logic of democratisation? And did they remain wedded to this logic despite strong counterindications? In this article, we adopt a historical institutionalist perspective to answer these questions. Based on a qualitative, interpretive thematic analysis of European Parliament (EP) debates and resolutions, we demonstrate that in the 1970s, when in anticipation of the first direct EP elections the blueprint of European democracy was debated, pro‐EU MEPs debated different models and ultimately decided to follow the path of trickle‐down democracy. We then show that this choice was reinstated rather than revisited following Maastricht, as growing Euroscepticism in EU politics did not trigger the critical juncture historical institutionalism could expect.

Keywords: elections; EU democracy; European Parliament; historical analysis; political parties (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/9905 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cog:poango:v13:y:2025:a:9905

DOI: 10.17645/pag.9905

Access Statistics for this article

Politics and Governance is currently edited by Carolina Correia

More articles in Politics and Governance from Cogitatio Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by António Vieira () and IT Department ().