La qualité de la démocratie [Quality of democracy]
'What a good democracy?' is an old question in political science. It has been addressed by various scholars in normative terms nourishing the intellectual debate in political theory. On the one hand, the last two decades the question of the democratic deficit of the European Union has become one of the most popular topics of conferences in European studies. On the other hand, at the domestic level, political scientists never tired mentioning the weaknesses of the nascent democracies in Central and Eastern Europe, in Latin America and in other parts of the world where 'democracy' just recently became 'the only game in town'. In recent years the focus of the literature on democracy and the quality of democracy has changed, moving from the analysis of newly democratic regimes in Latin American countries, southern Europe, and Central and Eastern Europe, to the analysis of consolidated democracies. The idea of a democracy's crisis linked to the globalization and europeanization processes in Western Europe highlighted the importance of analyzing even the state of the western democracies. At this point, a theoretical approach that goes beyond single regional specificities and constitutes a framework for the analysis of different democratic systems, even through the comparative method, is needed for a better understanding of the transformation of the European democracies 'The state' and 'the quality of democracy' arouse the interest of a growing number of political scientists. What is changing in the functioning of our democracies, compared to what and under what conditions? What these new transformations are like and what impact do they have on our democratic regimes? What are the 'new' features of our democracies? How to integrate 'the functioning'/outputs of a democracy in the understanding of the state of democracy? How can we improve our understanding of the processes that were transforming the state of consolidated/nascent democracies? According to the empirical evidence scholars take into account and the theoretical assumptions about key variables and the environment within action takes place, the conclusions to these questions are not yet fully convincing for at least two reasons. The first one is that democracy has not a consensual or clear cut definition. The second one is related to the attention paid to the constitutional designs of political regimes without taking into account the policy practice. Speaking about the 'quality' or the 'state' of democracy implies to provide not only an appropriate definition of what a 'good' democracy is but also a coherent picture of the main transformations and challenges faced by our democracies. This research agenda developed within the CEVIPOL considers different innovations as a necessary step to progress: it is necessary to take into consideration the plurality of the empirical fields and topics. But also the inputs of the democratic system (political parties, civil society, participation, responsiveness) and on the other hand the outputs (institutions, public policies). Renewing this research agenda implies the multi-level nature of the analysis, with a particular attention to the supra-national and regional level; the methodological pluralism, with the aim to bring together qualitative and quantitative approaches in a case-oriented perspective. ['What is a good democracy?' is an old question in political science. It has been addressed by various scholars in normative terms nourishing the intellectual debate in political theory. On the one hand, the last two decades the question of the democratic deficit of the European Union has become one of the most popular topics of conferences in European studies. On the other hand, at the domestic level, political scientists never tired mentioning the weaknesses of the nascent democracies in Central and Eastern Europe, in Latin America and in other parts of the world where 'democracy' just recently became 'the only game in town'. In recent years the focus of the literature on democracy and the quality of democracy has changed, moving from the analysis of newly democratic regimes in Latin American countries, southern Europe, and Central and Eastern Europe, to the analysis of consolidated democracies. The idea of a democracy's crisis linked to the globalization and europeanization processes in Western Europe highlighted the importance of analyzing even the state of the western democracies. At this point, a theoretical approach that goes beyond single regional specificities and constitutes a framework for the analysis of different democratic systems, even through the comparative method, is needed for a better understanding of the transformation of the European democracies 'The state' and 'the quality of democracy' arouse the interest of a growing number of political scientists. What is changing in the functioning of our democracies, compared to what and under what conditions? What these new transformations are like and what impact do they have on our democratic regimes? What are the 'new' features of our democracies? How to integrate 'the functioning'/outputs of a democracy in the understanding of the state of democracy? How can we improve our understanding of the processes that were transforming the state of consolidated/nascent democracies? According to the empirical evidence scholars take into account and the theoretical assumptions about key variables and the environment within action takes place, the conclusions to these questions are not yet fully convincing for at least two reasons. The first one is that democracy has not a consensual or clear cut definition. The second one is related to the attention paid to the constitutional designs of political regimes without taking into account the policy practice. Speaking about the 'quality' or the 'state' of democracy implies to provide not only an appropriate definition of what a 'good' democracy is but also a coherent picture of the main transformations and challenges faced by our democracies. This research agenda developed within the CEVIPOL considers different innovations as a necessary step to progress: it is necessary to take into consideration the plurality of the empirical fields and topics. But also the inputs of the democratic system (political parties, civil society, participation, responsiveness) and on the other hand the outputs (institutions, public policies). Renewing this research agenda implies the multi-level nature of the analysis, with a particular attention to the supra-national and regional level; the methodological pluralism, with the aim to bring together qualitative and quantitative approaches in a case-oriented perspective. ]