Search results

Die Expertise beschreibt, analysiert und erklärt die Entwicklung des Bologna-Prozesses sowie den daraus entstehenden europäischen Hochschulraum. Dazu werden Themen, Akteur:innen, Strukturen und Mechanismen beschrieben und kritische Stimmen aus Bildungspolitik und Wissenschaft zur Sprache gebracht. Mittels Policy-Analyse und Gesellschaftstheorie wird erklärt, warum der komplexe Prozess trotz geringer Verrechtlichung große Auswirkungen auf die Hochschullandschaft hatte. Autorin und Autor analysieren den Status quo nach der Minister:innenkonferenz in Paris 2018 sowie mögliche Zukunftsszenarien und zeigen auf, wie Akteur:innen an Hochschulen die Weiterentwicklung des europäischen Hochschulraumes bis 2030 beeinflussen können.

First published: 28 October 2016 ; Awarded the JCMS 2017 Best Article Prize ; With the help of the Immigrant Inclusion Index (IMIX), a quantitative tool for measuring the electoral inclusion of immigrants, we demonstrate that European democracies are much more exclusive than they should be. All normative theories of democracy share the conviction that it is imperative that democracies include long-term immigrant residents into the demos – either by granting citizenship or by introducing alien voting rights. But even the 20 most established and stable democracies within the EU are far from fully realizing the ideal of 'universal suffrage'. This is true independently of whether we count in- and excluded people in numerical terms, or whether we evaluate the relevant laws and regulations. Therefore, we diagnose a substantial democratic deficit on the level of European nation-states. By requiring its member states to enfranchise non-national EU citizens on the local level, the EU, for once, plays a positive role in reducing one of the most fundamental democratic deficits in times of migration.

AbstractWith the help of the Immigrant Inclusion Index (IMIX), a quantitative tool for measuring the electoral inclusion of immigrants, we demonstrate that European democracies are much more exclusive than they should be. All normative theories of democracy share the conviction that it is imperative that democracies include long‐term immigrant residents into the demos – either by granting citizenship or by introducing alien voting rights. But even the 20 most established and stable democracies within the EU are far from fully realizing the ideal of 'universal suffrage'. This is true independently of whether we count in‐ and excluded people in numerical terms, or whether we evaluate the relevant laws and regulations. Therefore, we diagnose a substantial democratic deficit on the level of European nation‐states. By requiring its member states to enfranchise non‐national EU citizens on the local level, the EU, for once, plays a positive role in reducing one of the most fundamental democratic deficits in times of migration.

Abstract Today democratic nation-states are confronted with populations that consist not only of seden-tary residents, but also of immigrants. For these democracies to retain full legitimacy, it is imperative that long-term immigrant residents are also included into the demos, so that all those who are subjected to national laws can take part in creating them. Treating this consensus in democratic theory as a normative benchmark, in this paper we develop the nucleus of a quantitative tool for the comparative evaluation of democracies with respect to their electoral inclusiveness toward immigrants. We specify the underlying concept of electoral inclusiveness by taking into account both de jure and de facto meanings as its fundamental dimensions as well as access to citizenship and alien enfranchisement as the two mechanisms leading to inclusion. For measurement, we combine existing indicators such as indices of the inclusiveness of naturalization laws with original indicators such as the percentage of enfranchised noncitizens among all long-term immigrant residents. Aggregated according to our normative framework, the resulting Immigrant Inclusion Index (IMIX) shows that in most of the 22 European countries under scrutiny the electoral inclusiveness with respect to immigrants is far away from what it should be according to normative theories of democracy. This is true inde-pendent of whether we look at the laws and regulations of these democracies or whether we evaluate how well they actually function. Hence, we can diagnose a substantial democratic deficit with respect to electoral inclusion across Europe. However, in both dimensions there are significant differences among European democracies; and we find that alien enfranchisement is not used as a substitute for access to citizenship. We conclude by indicating how our evaluative tool could be expanded or modified. ; Sprache: eng