欧盟多层治理框架内欧洲公民社会组织的政治参与
|
摘要
2009年《里斯本条约》正式生效以来,欧洲一体化翻开了崭新的一页,欧盟进入一个新的发展阶段：在50多年来的运作实践中,欧盟已经成长为一个强大的机构角色,获得了更强的竞争力,布鲁塞尔的决策制订越来越影响并改变着成员国的政治生态以及普通人的日常生活。在欧盟这样独特而复杂的多元化的背景下,如何做好社会协调,保证各阶层的参与,进而保证决策的民主性、科学性、可执行性,实现有效的民主治理,是非常重大的问题。欧盟是如此独特的一个政治体系,不可能完全复制民族国家采用的民主体系和制度。欧洲政治一体化进程中的挫折,尤其是欧盟宪法条约的失败让欧盟机构意识到,要尊重民意,在决策前吸取欧洲公民意见,从制度上保证并强化多元社会角色的参与。从另外一个角度看,在现代社会,公民对政治生活的参与,需要有合理的中介和代表,通过适当的组织机构来表达自己的利益诉求,公民社会组织就是公民参政议政的渠道之一。在欧盟多层治理框架下,公民社会组织作为公民多元利益的组织化代表,也得到了欧盟决策机构的重视,成为治理的主体之一,成为欧盟事务的积极参与者。
在掌握大量国内外有关欧盟欧盟治理和公民社会等方面研究的资料和文献的基础上,本文从一个新的角度对欧盟治理的过程进行了较为深入的研究,把林肯关于民主的定义--民有、民治和民享(government of the people, by the people and for the people)--和内涵延伸到欧盟治理层面,着重探讨欧盟这一特殊政体内部如何通过公民及其组织对欧盟决策过程的参与来体现民治意义上的民主治理(governance by the people),以弥补欧盟民主合法性的不足,促进欧盟治理的实现。文章结构安排和主要观点如下：
第一章、公民社会理论和内涵的历史演进。公民社会概念在欧洲有着悠久的历史传统,其久远历史可以追溯至古希腊罗马时代,其理论内涵随着人类社会和政治体系的发展而不断演进。
古典理论认为公民社会是与野蛮状态相对立的文明社会,也是由公民构成的政治社会。中世纪后期,随着东西方贸易的发展,现代意义上的城市在欧洲相继兴起,市民为了保护自己的经济利益不受侵害,自愿组织起行业协会和同业公会,这些是广义上公民社会组织的最初形态。13-15世纪在欧洲波罗的海流域形成的汉萨同盟作为具有一些政治功能的商业贸易联合体,从某种意义上讲,是欧洲最早的跨越国界的市民社会组织,其性质与本文所讨论的欧盟范围内的公民社会组织有共同之处。
而在近代启蒙思想家如洛克、孟德斯鸠等的理论中,公民社会就是政治社会,与自然状态相对立,而此时国家就是拥有了最高权威的政治社会。以黑格尔和马克思为代表的现代公民社会理论,把公民社会与政治国家分离开来,此时的公民社会主要是经济关系。
而当代思想家则把公民社会视为与国家(政治)、市场(经济)分离的的一个社会领域,国际关系学者们则把视线转向国际层面的公民社会概念,如对全球公民社会和欧盟层面公民社会的探讨等。在欧盟官方文件和多层治理的实践中,公民社会概念的演变也经历了一个曲折的过程,分为不同的阶段,而这个过程则标识着公民社会的地位和作用的变化,也是欧盟机构与公民社会关系不断发展的进程。
第二章、欧盟多层次治理：公民社会组织参与的历史与制度背景。欧盟经历治理转型之后,形成了多元性、多层次性的网络型治理结构。参与欧盟多层治理的主体,范围甚广,其中不仅有欧盟官方机构,各成员国层面和次国家层面的政府和行政管理机构、政党、非政府组织、利益集团、媒体以及公共舆论,当然也包括了各成员国的公民。因而,这个独特的治理安排具有极大的开放性和包容性,为公民社会组织的参与提供了良好的机会结构,因而成为公民社会政治参与的制度背景。
欧盟机构已经认识到了建立一个更连贯一致的框架来改善与公民社会关系的重要性,以欧盟委员会为首的欧盟机构,采取了不同的方式把公民社会组织纳入政策制订过程,而欧盟政策过程为各类社会角色的参与提供了具体路径和可能性。
第三章、欧洲公民社会组织的发展历程与现状。在欧洲一体化进程开始之前,随着民族国家的发展程度不同,公民社会团体作为民族国家的一部分,带有明显的地域性的政治和文化的烙印,这即是公民社会组织沿袭至今的社会嵌入性的根源。
20世纪中期自欧洲一体化的发动机开启之后,欧洲层面的公民社会组织开始出现并随着一体化的进程而得到了不断发展,一体化初期在欧洲层面工人的组织和消费者保护组织成立；而90年代马斯特里赫特条约以来这个时期的共同体层面的各类组织数量呈现显著的增长态势,活动范围也在不断扩大；最近的10年欧洲公民社会组织的数量和规模都得到了长足的发展,其活跃的领域也大有扩展,公民社会组织也逐渐走向了制度化、职业化。
整体来看,欧洲公民社会组织的构成形态或结构基本上属于网络组织(network of networks)或伞形组织(umbrella organization, federation of federations),涉及到成千上万的社团组织,在各具有高度公众关注、政治显著性的政策和议题领域(社会政策、环境保护、健康和消费者权益)为公民提供了表达渠道,以集体的方式给社会中的弱者在政治体系中提供话语机会。这就说明公民社会组织已经在欧盟层面组织起来,维护弱势群体利益、实现公共利益,为公民提供了利益表达的一个平台和渠道。
第四章、欧洲公民社会组织的政治参与：驱动力、多元化渠道和方式。在客观条件和外界环境来看,欧盟各机构在一系列的政策文件或条约中指出了公民社会行为体对于欧盟政策制定过程的(潜在)贡献,采取不同方式方法把公民社会乃至公民个人纳入欧盟的政策过程,创造了很多咨询和对话机制,从制度和法律方面确保公民社会组织的参与。其中,比较积极和活跃的是欧盟委员会、欧洲议会和欧洲经济社会委员会。
在主观的认知和能力方面,纵向来看,公民社会组织的政治行为不仅要受成员逻辑(logic of membership)的影响,还受到影响的逻辑(logic of influence)指导。欧盟机构和欧盟政策过程塑造了欧盟治理语境下的公民社会话语,也影响到公民社会组织对自身作用和功能的认识和界定。同时,公民社会组织也具备了与民族国家内部各类政治权威和其他利益团体斗争抑或是合作的能力,在超国家机构、国家机构的互动中积累了相当的经验,民主参与能力得到锻炼和培养,而其自我管理、自我规制能力也得到锻炼和提高。
欧洲公民社会组织对欧盟治理的政治参与的方式和途径主要有：直接参与到和决策有关过程,如参加欧盟机构的咨询、对话、反馈等决策环节,反映自己的偏好和愿望;间接影响决策,如通过和欧盟机构和官员建立长期的经常性的联系、游说、举行抗议活动、大型运动等,对决策机构施加压力,提高公众意识和欧盟机构对某议题的重视；在传统的策略之外,还充分利用欧盟机构的电子政府功能积极参与到欧盟政治过程。
第五章、公民社会组织参与欧盟多层治理的价值评价。作为公民群体的制度化的利益表达途径之一,公民社会组织成为欧盟治理结构中的参与主体。公民社会组织的参与被欧盟机构和学者们视为是欧盟民主合法性缺乏症的解药,具有民主潜质。
公民社会组织是民主的学校,可以给公民们提供民主生活必要的训练、知识和经验,具有教育和社会化功能。公民社会组织在欧盟治理结构内部也承担了组织社会生活的功能,是阐明合法的国家或治理结构方法或手段,借由界定公共机构和民众的各自不同的活动范围,动员、鼓励并促成疏离的个人参与政治,既减轻了公共机构的负担,这无疑也会强化公民之间的团结。
在欧盟这个庞大的利益代表体系中,公民社会组织是重要的构成元素。这样,公民社会组织在跨国的欧盟层面代表着公民,并负责监督政治过程以使决策者对自己的行为负责。而在欧盟的参与式民主中,公民社会组织是最重要的角色。在欧盟治理框架内,代议制民主和参与式民主相辅相成,共同构成了欧盟民主生活。而公民社会组织就身处这样的民主环境中,具有了不同于其他社会和政治角色的身份和地位,成为欧盟治理合法性的来源。
欧洲公民社会组织的参与是欧盟民主生活的组成部分,但民族国家的安排仍然起着实质性的决定作用,国家及其代理人仍然掌握着欧盟机构的运行及决策过程,因而公民社会组织获得的是只是发言权而不是决定权。与拥有雄厚资源实力的经济利益集团和大公司比较起来,欧洲公民社会组织可以获得的机会和能够对欧盟政策施加的影响却又比较弱小和有限。
可以肯定的是,欧盟治理的实践起码为各类包括公民社会组织在内的社会角色提供了渠道或者机会结构,使得它们的意见和利益得以被欧盟官方机构所获悉,公民社会组织和普通公民都可以主动加入到欧盟的政策形成过程,而不再只是被动接受和回应政策对自己的影响,这样的实践会影响公民对欧盟的认知,对于进一步的欧洲认同的形成或有益处。
Since the enactment Lisbon Treaty in December 2009, the history of European integration steps on a new platform. After more than 50 years practice, The European. Union grows into a powerful institutional player, and gains more competence. The decision taken at the European Capital are increasingly influencing and changing the national political ecology as well the daily life of common people. Under the sui generis and complex circumstances of the EU, it is an urgent and severe problem, to accomplish the goal of effective governance, via social coordination, the participation of societal groups, and also scientific decision. However, the Union is sui generis system so that it could not simply duplicate the democratic system like the national states. The drawing back of the European political integration, in particular the failure of the EU Constitutional Treaty drive EU institutions to recognize the significance of respecting the public opinion, and of strengthening the participation of diversified societal actors in policy process. On the other hand, in modern society most of citizens could only participate in the political life through appropriate medium and representatives (such as political parties or interest groups), to articulate their interest and demand, rather than present themselves at the level of decision making. Civil society organizations are just such participatory channel for citizens. Under the framework of EU multilevel governance, civil society organizations as institutional representatives of various interests are active player in the European affaires.
The thesis presents a new perspective on the European governance, namely, extending the Lincoln's definition on democracy (government of the people, by the people and for the people) to the European level. It is of great interest to investigate the potential contribution of European civil society organizations to the democracy in the sense of "governance by the people" in this specific polity of EU. The thesis proceeds as follows.
CHAPTER 1 Historical Evolution of the Civil Society Theories
The long tradition of the concept of Civil Society in Europe could trace back to ancient Greek and Roma times. Classical civil society theory regards civil society as civilized society that is opposite to the Barbarism society, and also political society composing citizens. In late medieval times, modern cities became into being with the development of east-west trade. With the view of protecting their own interest, the residents of cities voluntarily joined the guilds and associations, which could be viewed as enfant form of civil society organization. Hanseatic League in 13-15 century as a commercial and trade federation with political function also could be regarded as European civil society organization in some broad sense.
In the eyes of enlightenment thinkers, such as Locke, Montesquieu, civil society equated to political society, namely the state. Hegel and Karl Marx separated civil society from political state, and civil society mainly referred to the economic relations.
Contemporary theorists regard the civil society as a social sphere different form state (political sphere) and market (economic sphere), whilst the students of international relation turn to the civil society concept beyond the nation state, such as the global civil society and European civil society. In official documents and governance practice of the EU, the civil society concept also has undergone different stages, which represent the gradual transformation of role and function of civil society, also the relationship between the EU institutions and the civil society.
CHAPTER 2 European Multilevel Governance: Historical and Institutional Background for the Participation of Civil Society Organizations
After the Governance turn, the European Union turns into a diversified, multilevel network governance structure. European governance brings pluralist actors into its system, including EU institutions, national governments and administrative of member states, sub-national and local governments, political parties, NGOs, interest groups, media and public opinion, as well as the citizens of member states. Hence, with great openness and inclusiveness, the unique governance arrangement of EU offers civil society organizations an opportunity structure, and then becomes the institutional framework for the for the participation of civil society organizations.
In recent years, EU institutions have recognized the need to establish a more coherent framework to improve their relation with civil society actors. This holds true, in particular, for the supranational institutions of the EU, above all the European Commission (EC). The European Parliament (EP) and the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) have been very active in bringing the civil society organizations into the policy making, which offers access and possibility for various societal actors.
CHAPTER 3 Historical Development and the Status Quo of European Civil Society Organizations
In pre-EU time in Europe, as part of political life in nation states, civil society groups bear territorial, political and cultural imprint, which serves as deep-rooted social embeddedness of today's civil society organizations.
Since the establishment of European Community, Civil Society Organizations appeared at European level and evolve with the development of European Integration. At the early period, European organizations on workers and consumer were established. Since the Maastricht Treaty the number of Community level organizations increased fast, the range of their activities got widened. In Recent 10 years, beyond the increased number and issue areas, there is a trend of professionalization in the European Civil Society Organizations.
In terms of the organizational structure, European Civil Society Organizations come under the category of network of networks or umbrella organization, federation of federations, involving thousands of organizations and associations. They are active at high salient policy areas, such as social policy, environment protection, health and consumer, etc. Thus, they offer channel for citizens, give voice to the weaker in society in a manner of collective action. In other words, civil society has been organized on European level.
CHAPTER4 Political Participation of European Civil Society Organizations: incentives, diversified channels and patterns
Regarding the incentives for the Participation of European civil society organizations, there are favorable external environment and conditions, and also incentives based on subjective cognition and capability of the civil society actors themselves. For the former factor, EU institutions, above all the European Commission, European Parliament and European Economic and Social Committee, recognized the potential contribution of civil society actors to EU politics in a series of policy documents and treaties, and take various effective measures to involve the civil society into the policy process. For this purpose, the consultation and dialogue mechanisms with civil society organization have been strengthened, and thus set up legal basis and institutional guarantee for participation of European civil society organizations.
In terms of the subjective factor, civil society organizations are subject to the logic of membership and the logic of influence. EU institutions together with the policy process shaped the civil society discourse under the background of EU governance, and this influences the cognition of civil society organizations on their own role and function. Moreover, civil society organizations gain experience of interacting with supranational institutions and governments, and thus are equipped with capabilities of competing and cooperating with other institutions and interest groups. In short, European civil society organizations have acquired capabilities of democratic participation, self-management and self-regulation in practice.
There are diversified channels for civil society organizations to engage in the European governance: direct participation in policy process, such as consultation, dialogue and feedback etc.; indirect influence on the decision-making, such as lobbying, demonstration, campaign etc. In addition, it is another strategy influencing the policy process for civil society organizations to take part in the interactive network of the EU e-government.
CHAPTER 5 Assessment Participation of European Civil Society Organizations in European Multilevel Governance
As one institutionalized channel of interest intermediation of citizen groups, civil society organizations are active players in EU governance. It is the expectation of EU institutions and academia to eliminate the democratic deficit via involvement of European civil society organizations.
Civil society organizations serve as school of democracy, offering citizens necessary training, knowledge and experience. That is to say, civil society organizations bear the function of socialization. In the European governance structure, civil society organizations also take the role of organizing social life, adding legitimacy to the public institution and the governance structure. They motivate, encourage and facilitate the alienated individuals to engage in politics. As a result, the workload of public institution would be reduced, and the solidarity among citizens strengthened.
In the democratic life of the EU, participation of European Civil Society Organization equate to "governance by the people". In the democratic representation system of the EU, on one hand, civil society organization is important constituency, since they represent the citizens on supranational level, and monitor the political process to make the decision maker accountable. In EU participatory democracy, on the other hand, civil society organizations are foremost actors. Under the framework of European governance, representative democracy and participatory democracy complement each other, thus constitute EU democratic life. Under such circumstances, civil society organizations comprise the source of democratic legitimacy. Nonetheless, the civil society organizations only acquire voice rather than vote in European governance, and their influence on the politics is rather weaker than economic interest groups.
To be sure, EU governance offers societal actors including European civil society organizations political opportunity structure, channeling their interests and opinions heard on EU institutions. Hence, civil society organizations and common people could actively join the policy process of the EU, rather than passively respond to the policies. Such practice would influence the cognition of the European citizens on the Union, and this may contribute to the further European identity.
在掌握大量国内外有关欧盟欧盟治理和公民社会等方面研究的资料和文献的基础上,本文从一个新的角度对欧盟治理的过程进行了较为深入的研究,把林肯关于民主的定义--民有、民治和民享(government of the people, by the people and for the people)--和内涵延伸到欧盟治理层面,着重探讨欧盟这一特殊政体内部如何通过公民及其组织对欧盟决策过程的参与来体现民治意义上的民主治理(governance by the people),以弥补欧盟民主合法性的不足,促进欧盟治理的实现。文章结构安排和主要观点如下：
第一章、公民社会理论和内涵的历史演进。公民社会概念在欧洲有着悠久的历史传统,其久远历史可以追溯至古希腊罗马时代,其理论内涵随着人类社会和政治体系的发展而不断演进。
古典理论认为公民社会是与野蛮状态相对立的文明社会,也是由公民构成的政治社会。中世纪后期,随着东西方贸易的发展,现代意义上的城市在欧洲相继兴起,市民为了保护自己的经济利益不受侵害,自愿组织起行业协会和同业公会,这些是广义上公民社会组织的最初形态。13-15世纪在欧洲波罗的海流域形成的汉萨同盟作为具有一些政治功能的商业贸易联合体,从某种意义上讲,是欧洲最早的跨越国界的市民社会组织,其性质与本文所讨论的欧盟范围内的公民社会组织有共同之处。
而在近代启蒙思想家如洛克、孟德斯鸠等的理论中,公民社会就是政治社会,与自然状态相对立,而此时国家就是拥有了最高权威的政治社会。以黑格尔和马克思为代表的现代公民社会理论,把公民社会与政治国家分离开来,此时的公民社会主要是经济关系。
而当代思想家则把公民社会视为与国家(政治)、市场(经济)分离的的一个社会领域,国际关系学者们则把视线转向国际层面的公民社会概念,如对全球公民社会和欧盟层面公民社会的探讨等。在欧盟官方文件和多层治理的实践中,公民社会概念的演变也经历了一个曲折的过程,分为不同的阶段,而这个过程则标识着公民社会的地位和作用的变化,也是欧盟机构与公民社会关系不断发展的进程。
第二章、欧盟多层次治理：公民社会组织参与的历史与制度背景。欧盟经历治理转型之后,形成了多元性、多层次性的网络型治理结构。参与欧盟多层治理的主体,范围甚广,其中不仅有欧盟官方机构,各成员国层面和次国家层面的政府和行政管理机构、政党、非政府组织、利益集团、媒体以及公共舆论,当然也包括了各成员国的公民。因而,这个独特的治理安排具有极大的开放性和包容性,为公民社会组织的参与提供了良好的机会结构,因而成为公民社会政治参与的制度背景。
欧盟机构已经认识到了建立一个更连贯一致的框架来改善与公民社会关系的重要性,以欧盟委员会为首的欧盟机构,采取了不同的方式把公民社会组织纳入政策制订过程,而欧盟政策过程为各类社会角色的参与提供了具体路径和可能性。
第三章、欧洲公民社会组织的发展历程与现状。在欧洲一体化进程开始之前,随着民族国家的发展程度不同,公民社会团体作为民族国家的一部分,带有明显的地域性的政治和文化的烙印,这即是公民社会组织沿袭至今的社会嵌入性的根源。
20世纪中期自欧洲一体化的发动机开启之后,欧洲层面的公民社会组织开始出现并随着一体化的进程而得到了不断发展,一体化初期在欧洲层面工人的组织和消费者保护组织成立；而90年代马斯特里赫特条约以来这个时期的共同体层面的各类组织数量呈现显著的增长态势,活动范围也在不断扩大；最近的10年欧洲公民社会组织的数量和规模都得到了长足的发展,其活跃的领域也大有扩展,公民社会组织也逐渐走向了制度化、职业化。
整体来看,欧洲公民社会组织的构成形态或结构基本上属于网络组织(network of networks)或伞形组织(umbrella organization, federation of federations),涉及到成千上万的社团组织,在各具有高度公众关注、政治显著性的政策和议题领域(社会政策、环境保护、健康和消费者权益)为公民提供了表达渠道,以集体的方式给社会中的弱者在政治体系中提供话语机会。这就说明公民社会组织已经在欧盟层面组织起来,维护弱势群体利益、实现公共利益,为公民提供了利益表达的一个平台和渠道。
第四章、欧洲公民社会组织的政治参与：驱动力、多元化渠道和方式。在客观条件和外界环境来看,欧盟各机构在一系列的政策文件或条约中指出了公民社会行为体对于欧盟政策制定过程的(潜在)贡献,采取不同方式方法把公民社会乃至公民个人纳入欧盟的政策过程,创造了很多咨询和对话机制,从制度和法律方面确保公民社会组织的参与。其中,比较积极和活跃的是欧盟委员会、欧洲议会和欧洲经济社会委员会。
在主观的认知和能力方面,纵向来看,公民社会组织的政治行为不仅要受成员逻辑(logic of membership)的影响,还受到影响的逻辑(logic of influence)指导。欧盟机构和欧盟政策过程塑造了欧盟治理语境下的公民社会话语,也影响到公民社会组织对自身作用和功能的认识和界定。同时,公民社会组织也具备了与民族国家内部各类政治权威和其他利益团体斗争抑或是合作的能力,在超国家机构、国家机构的互动中积累了相当的经验,民主参与能力得到锻炼和培养,而其自我管理、自我规制能力也得到锻炼和提高。
欧洲公民社会组织对欧盟治理的政治参与的方式和途径主要有：直接参与到和决策有关过程,如参加欧盟机构的咨询、对话、反馈等决策环节,反映自己的偏好和愿望;间接影响决策,如通过和欧盟机构和官员建立长期的经常性的联系、游说、举行抗议活动、大型运动等,对决策机构施加压力,提高公众意识和欧盟机构对某议题的重视；在传统的策略之外,还充分利用欧盟机构的电子政府功能积极参与到欧盟政治过程。
第五章、公民社会组织参与欧盟多层治理的价值评价。作为公民群体的制度化的利益表达途径之一,公民社会组织成为欧盟治理结构中的参与主体。公民社会组织的参与被欧盟机构和学者们视为是欧盟民主合法性缺乏症的解药,具有民主潜质。
公民社会组织是民主的学校,可以给公民们提供民主生活必要的训练、知识和经验,具有教育和社会化功能。公民社会组织在欧盟治理结构内部也承担了组织社会生活的功能,是阐明合法的国家或治理结构方法或手段,借由界定公共机构和民众的各自不同的活动范围,动员、鼓励并促成疏离的个人参与政治,既减轻了公共机构的负担,这无疑也会强化公民之间的团结。
在欧盟这个庞大的利益代表体系中,公民社会组织是重要的构成元素。这样,公民社会组织在跨国的欧盟层面代表着公民,并负责监督政治过程以使决策者对自己的行为负责。而在欧盟的参与式民主中,公民社会组织是最重要的角色。在欧盟治理框架内,代议制民主和参与式民主相辅相成,共同构成了欧盟民主生活。而公民社会组织就身处这样的民主环境中,具有了不同于其他社会和政治角色的身份和地位,成为欧盟治理合法性的来源。
欧洲公民社会组织的参与是欧盟民主生活的组成部分,但民族国家的安排仍然起着实质性的决定作用,国家及其代理人仍然掌握着欧盟机构的运行及决策过程,因而公民社会组织获得的是只是发言权而不是决定权。与拥有雄厚资源实力的经济利益集团和大公司比较起来,欧洲公民社会组织可以获得的机会和能够对欧盟政策施加的影响却又比较弱小和有限。
可以肯定的是,欧盟治理的实践起码为各类包括公民社会组织在内的社会角色提供了渠道或者机会结构,使得它们的意见和利益得以被欧盟官方机构所获悉,公民社会组织和普通公民都可以主动加入到欧盟的政策形成过程,而不再只是被动接受和回应政策对自己的影响,这样的实践会影响公民对欧盟的认知,对于进一步的欧洲认同的形成或有益处。
Since the enactment Lisbon Treaty in December 2009, the history of European integration steps on a new platform. After more than 50 years practice, The European. Union grows into a powerful institutional player, and gains more competence. The decision taken at the European Capital are increasingly influencing and changing the national political ecology as well the daily life of common people. Under the sui generis and complex circumstances of the EU, it is an urgent and severe problem, to accomplish the goal of effective governance, via social coordination, the participation of societal groups, and also scientific decision. However, the Union is sui generis system so that it could not simply duplicate the democratic system like the national states. The drawing back of the European political integration, in particular the failure of the EU Constitutional Treaty drive EU institutions to recognize the significance of respecting the public opinion, and of strengthening the participation of diversified societal actors in policy process. On the other hand, in modern society most of citizens could only participate in the political life through appropriate medium and representatives (such as political parties or interest groups), to articulate their interest and demand, rather than present themselves at the level of decision making. Civil society organizations are just such participatory channel for citizens. Under the framework of EU multilevel governance, civil society organizations as institutional representatives of various interests are active player in the European affaires.
The thesis presents a new perspective on the European governance, namely, extending the Lincoln's definition on democracy (government of the people, by the people and for the people) to the European level. It is of great interest to investigate the potential contribution of European civil society organizations to the democracy in the sense of "governance by the people" in this specific polity of EU. The thesis proceeds as follows.
CHAPTER 1 Historical Evolution of the Civil Society Theories
The long tradition of the concept of Civil Society in Europe could trace back to ancient Greek and Roma times. Classical civil society theory regards civil society as civilized society that is opposite to the Barbarism society, and also political society composing citizens. In late medieval times, modern cities became into being with the development of east-west trade. With the view of protecting their own interest, the residents of cities voluntarily joined the guilds and associations, which could be viewed as enfant form of civil society organization. Hanseatic League in 13-15 century as a commercial and trade federation with political function also could be regarded as European civil society organization in some broad sense.
In the eyes of enlightenment thinkers, such as Locke, Montesquieu, civil society equated to political society, namely the state. Hegel and Karl Marx separated civil society from political state, and civil society mainly referred to the economic relations.
Contemporary theorists regard the civil society as a social sphere different form state (political sphere) and market (economic sphere), whilst the students of international relation turn to the civil society concept beyond the nation state, such as the global civil society and European civil society. In official documents and governance practice of the EU, the civil society concept also has undergone different stages, which represent the gradual transformation of role and function of civil society, also the relationship between the EU institutions and the civil society.
CHAPTER 2 European Multilevel Governance: Historical and Institutional Background for the Participation of Civil Society Organizations
After the Governance turn, the European Union turns into a diversified, multilevel network governance structure. European governance brings pluralist actors into its system, including EU institutions, national governments and administrative of member states, sub-national and local governments, political parties, NGOs, interest groups, media and public opinion, as well as the citizens of member states. Hence, with great openness and inclusiveness, the unique governance arrangement of EU offers civil society organizations an opportunity structure, and then becomes the institutional framework for the for the participation of civil society organizations.
In recent years, EU institutions have recognized the need to establish a more coherent framework to improve their relation with civil society actors. This holds true, in particular, for the supranational institutions of the EU, above all the European Commission (EC). The European Parliament (EP) and the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) have been very active in bringing the civil society organizations into the policy making, which offers access and possibility for various societal actors.
CHAPTER 3 Historical Development and the Status Quo of European Civil Society Organizations
In pre-EU time in Europe, as part of political life in nation states, civil society groups bear territorial, political and cultural imprint, which serves as deep-rooted social embeddedness of today's civil society organizations.
Since the establishment of European Community, Civil Society Organizations appeared at European level and evolve with the development of European Integration. At the early period, European organizations on workers and consumer were established. Since the Maastricht Treaty the number of Community level organizations increased fast, the range of their activities got widened. In Recent 10 years, beyond the increased number and issue areas, there is a trend of professionalization in the European Civil Society Organizations.
In terms of the organizational structure, European Civil Society Organizations come under the category of network of networks or umbrella organization, federation of federations, involving thousands of organizations and associations. They are active at high salient policy areas, such as social policy, environment protection, health and consumer, etc. Thus, they offer channel for citizens, give voice to the weaker in society in a manner of collective action. In other words, civil society has been organized on European level.
CHAPTER4 Political Participation of European Civil Society Organizations: incentives, diversified channels and patterns
Regarding the incentives for the Participation of European civil society organizations, there are favorable external environment and conditions, and also incentives based on subjective cognition and capability of the civil society actors themselves. For the former factor, EU institutions, above all the European Commission, European Parliament and European Economic and Social Committee, recognized the potential contribution of civil society actors to EU politics in a series of policy documents and treaties, and take various effective measures to involve the civil society into the policy process. For this purpose, the consultation and dialogue mechanisms with civil society organization have been strengthened, and thus set up legal basis and institutional guarantee for participation of European civil society organizations.
In terms of the subjective factor, civil society organizations are subject to the logic of membership and the logic of influence. EU institutions together with the policy process shaped the civil society discourse under the background of EU governance, and this influences the cognition of civil society organizations on their own role and function. Moreover, civil society organizations gain experience of interacting with supranational institutions and governments, and thus are equipped with capabilities of competing and cooperating with other institutions and interest groups. In short, European civil society organizations have acquired capabilities of democratic participation, self-management and self-regulation in practice.
There are diversified channels for civil society organizations to engage in the European governance: direct participation in policy process, such as consultation, dialogue and feedback etc.; indirect influence on the decision-making, such as lobbying, demonstration, campaign etc. In addition, it is another strategy influencing the policy process for civil society organizations to take part in the interactive network of the EU e-government.
CHAPTER 5 Assessment Participation of European Civil Society Organizations in European Multilevel Governance
As one institutionalized channel of interest intermediation of citizen groups, civil society organizations are active players in EU governance. It is the expectation of EU institutions and academia to eliminate the democratic deficit via involvement of European civil society organizations.
Civil society organizations serve as school of democracy, offering citizens necessary training, knowledge and experience. That is to say, civil society organizations bear the function of socialization. In the European governance structure, civil society organizations also take the role of organizing social life, adding legitimacy to the public institution and the governance structure. They motivate, encourage and facilitate the alienated individuals to engage in politics. As a result, the workload of public institution would be reduced, and the solidarity among citizens strengthened.
In the democratic life of the EU, participation of European Civil Society Organization equate to "governance by the people". In the democratic representation system of the EU, on one hand, civil society organization is important constituency, since they represent the citizens on supranational level, and monitor the political process to make the decision maker accountable. In EU participatory democracy, on the other hand, civil society organizations are foremost actors. Under the framework of European governance, representative democracy and participatory democracy complement each other, thus constitute EU democratic life. Under such circumstances, civil society organizations comprise the source of democratic legitimacy. Nonetheless, the civil society organizations only acquire voice rather than vote in European governance, and their influence on the politics is rather weaker than economic interest groups.
To be sure, EU governance offers societal actors including European civil society organizations political opportunity structure, channeling their interests and opinions heard on EU institutions. Hence, civil society organizations and common people could actively join the policy process of the EU, rather than passively respond to the policies. Such practice would influence the cognition of the European citizens on the Union, and this may contribute to the further European identity.
引文
①见Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995.
② (Kooiman 1993:2)
③原文为：Governing, has to be organized in a way to "enhance the independent adaptive, reactive, and problem-solving capacities of societal actors, which means to motivate and to enable them to react purposefully at any moment of changing conditions" (Mayntz 1993:15:Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995).
① Kohler-Koch 2005
②基欧汉/奈 2003：11
③ Kohler-Koch and Eising 1999: 14；Kohler-Koch 2005
④罗西瑙2001：5
⑤转引自俞可平 2002。
① Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2006
②科勒-科赫2006
③吴志成2003：40
④这个名词能够较好地概括社会角色对于欧盟事务的参与机制,由科勒-科赫教授和齐特尔倡导和运用。见Zittel 2007; Kohler-Koch 2007
①见Finke2007
②相关的论述如Kohler-Koch 1999; Jachtenfuchs;吴志成2003；科勒-科赫2006;Zimmer 2007; Kohler-Koch 2008d
③拉哈2004：119
④ Kohler-Koch 1999
⑤ Kohler-Koch 2006
⑥对于公开协调方式这一治理方式的“软”特性的论述,见Bierhoff and Shahin 2005;Smismans 2006; Benz 2007; Brandson 2008; Moeller 2010; de la Porte and Nanz 2007; March and Olsen 2008:192。
① Finke 2007；Zimmer 2007；Zimmer and Sittermann 2005;Peeters 2003;Kohler-Koch 2005:2008b
② Zimmer 2007;Saurugger 2007
③ March and Olsen1995:2
①这些指标是罗伯特·达尔在他的著作On Democracy和Democracy and its Critics中提出的,原文为“Before a policy is adopted, all the members the of the association must have equal and effective opportunities for making their views about should-be policy known to the other members.When the decision finally being made, every member must have an equal and effective opportunity to vote, and all votes must be counted as equal. Within reasonable limits as to time, each member must have equal and effective opportunities for learning about the relevant alternative policies and their likely consequences. The members must have the exclusive opportunity to decide how and, if they choose, what matters are to be placed on the agenda. Thus the democratic process required by the... preceding criteria is never dosed. The policies of the association are always open to change by the members, if they so choose. All, or at any rate most, adult permanent residents should have the full rights of citizens that are implied by the first four criteria."需要强调的是平等有效的机会 (equal and effective opportunities)在整个过程中非常重要。见Dahl 1989:37
② Jachtenfuchs 1997
③ Jachtenfuchs 1997
④ Hueller and Kohler-Koch 2008: Hueller 2008
⑤ "Europa erscheint uns als Hort der Demokratie". In Hartmut Kaelble.2001:Wege Zur Demokratie,von der Franzoesischen Revolution zur Europaeische Union.
⑥ Lipset 1960:77
⑦ Jachtenfuchs 1997; Jachtenfuchs, Diez and Jung 1998; Smismans 2004
① Beetham 1991
② Jachtenfuchs, Diez and Jung 1998; Parkinson 2003
③ Kohler-Koch et al 2004
④原文‘'Das Demokratiedefizit der Europaeische Union ist zu eineim Dauervorwurf an die Bruesseler Kommissare geworden".In Kaelble.2001. Wege Zur Demokratie,von der Franzoesischen Revolution zur Europaeische Union.
⑤相关的论述如Majone1998;Lord 2003; Follesdal and Hix 2005;Holzhacker 2007; Wiener 2007; Ehin 2008; Eriksen and Fossum 2010; Majone 2010.
⑥原文为"the growing democratic expectations that came with political integration, combined with institutions—he European Parliament in particular—hat can and should be measured according to democratic norms. "见 Warren 2009。
① Schardf 1999
② Follesdal and Hix2005
③ Mair and Thomassen 2010
④ Zimmner 2007
⑤ Habermas 1992; Zimmer 2007
①相关论述见Abromeit 1998; Lord 1998; Weiler 1995; Kohler-Koch 1999
②来自欧盟官方网站对民主赤字的术语解释。原文为：The democratic deficit is a concept invoked principally in the argument that the European Union and its various bodies suffer from a lack of democracy and seem inaccessible to the ordinary citizen because their method of operating is so complex. The view is that the Community institutional set-up is dominated by an institution combining legislative and government powers (the Council of the European Union) and an institution that lacks democratic legitimacy (the European Commission).At every stage of the European integration process, the question of democratic legitimacy has become increasingly sensitive. The Maastricht, Amsterdam and Nice Treaties have triggered the inclusion of the principle of democratic legitimacy within the institutional system by reinforcing the powers of Parliament with regard to the appointment and control of the Commission and successively extending the scope of the co-decision procedure. 见 http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/democratic_deficit_en.htm
③ Warleigh 2003:2
④ Armstrong 2002
⑤ Maloney and van Deth 2008:3
⑥ Peeters 2003
⑦见http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/democratic_deficit_en.htm
① Smismans 2007
② polycentric system of directly-deliberative polyarchy, or what is the same,'as a multilevel, large-scale and multi-perspectival polity based on the notions of a disaggregated democratic subject and patterns of diverse and dispersed democratic authority'.Erik Oddvar Eriksen and John Erik Fossum. Europe's Challenge: Reconstituting Europe or Reconstituting Democracy?, http://www.reconproject.eu/main.php/EriksenFossum Paper RECONworkshop Mar09.pdf?fileitem=5423278>
③ Weber 1913
④ Zimmer 2007
⑤ Zimmer and Sittermann 2005
⑥ Kohler-Koch 1999,2008;Zimmer 2007
①见英文版《里斯本条约》(Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community).
②伍慧萍2008
③ Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch 2007
④ Peeters 2003:Zimmer and Sittermann 2005; Zimmer 2007; Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch 2005,2008b,2010
⑤见德国曼海姆大学图书馆网站。
①见网站ISI web of knowledge.
②指European Framework Programme,是欧盟委员会对于科学研究的资助和支持计划,每4年为一个周期。自从1994年的第4次框架计划开始,对于人文和社会科学方面的研究进入欧盟资助的范围。在从1994到2006年间,受到资助的有关欧盟治理(EU governance)的课题为73项,参与课题研究的大学和科研机构751家,资助总额仅第5、6次计划就接近6300万欧元(数据见Larat and Schneider 2009, Trends and Patterns in Governance Research).
③ Zimmer 2007; Zimmer and Freise 2008:20
④ Zimmer 2007
⑤ Flora 1986
① Rosenau and Czempiel 1992
.Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995
③科勒-科赫2005
④科勒-科赫2003：282
⑤科勒-科赫2006
⑥ Consortia英文原意为大财团、大鳄。而布鲁塞尔的公民社会组织由于规模比较大,涵盖了诸多组织、会员总数也就非常可观,因而,称之为公民社会中的大鳄也不为过。
① Eisele 2005;Peeters 2003
② Greenwood 2007; Ruzza 2004
③ Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006
① Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007;Kohler-Koch 2008b;2008c; 2010
② Della Porta 2007: Ruzza 2004; Ruzza 2007; Ruzza 2005
③ Sudbery 2010
④ Finke 2007
⑤ Eising 2007;Steffek and Smismans 2007
⑥ Ruzza and Bozzini 2008; Bozzini 2007
⑦ Steffek and Nanz 2007
⑧ Lane 2010, Pleines 2010; Sissenich 2010; Kutter and Trappmann 2010
⑨ Zittel 2008; Kohler-Koch, De Bievre and Maloney 2008
①"Arguing other than bargaining", arguing与bargaining的区别在于,arguing是一个经过协商达成共识的过程,而bargaining则是零和游戏,是参与者对利益分配的讨价还价,A之得即是B之失。
② Kohler-Koch 1997: Kohler-Koch 2005b
③ Smismans 2003
④ Sanchez-Salgado 2007
⑤ Quittkat and Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch and Buth 2009; Persson 2007; Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006.
Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007
⑥ Fossum and Trenz 2006
⑦ Heinelt 2007; De Schutter 2002
⑧ Liebert and Trenz 2009
⑨ Rittbereer 2009:Trenz2009
⑩ Greenwood 2007
11 Mavrikos-Adamou2010
12 Friedrich 2007; Hueller 2008; Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006
13 Kohler-Koch2007a;Kohler-Koch 2007b
①最主要的是科勒-科赫教授对此方面的研究。见Kohler-Koch 2002; 2006;2007a;2007b;2008b;2008c;2008d;2009; 2010
① Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2006:28
② Mayntz 2004;Zimmer 2007; Finke 2007
③见欧盟官方网站对欧盟治理条目的术语解释。http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/governance_en.htm
① James G March and Johan P. Olsen.2005.Elaborating the new Institutionalism. ARENA Working paper No.11 1对于新制度主义的论述还可见于March and Olsen 1989,1995,2006；Kohler-Koch 2005c.
①科勒-科赫2006
② Habermas 1996: 359, Between Facts and Norms, Cambridge: Polity Press.
③ Habermas 1996: 367
①有关参与式民主的详细论述见Zittel and Fuchs 2007;Finke 2007
① Pitkin 1967:9
② Pollak et al 2009
③ Eriksen and Fossum 2008
④ Smismans 2004
⑤ Kohler-Koch et al 2004
⑥Kohler-Koch 2008c；Kohler-Koch 2008d
①邓正来1998：93
②孟德斯鸠1978：159
③孟德斯鸠1978：179
④黑格尔1996：289
① Habermas 1992:443
② Cohen & Arato 1994
③ Kocka 2002:16
④见Zimmer 2007.安奈特·季默女士(Annette Zimmer)是德国明斯特大学教授,任职于社会政策和政治学系,是国际第三部门学会的主席团成员(International Society of Third Sector Research, ISTR)。主要研究方向为非盈利部门、公民社会等,领衔多项有关第三部门、非盈利组织与欧盟治理研究课题,其作品在欧盟治理和公民社会领域有一定地位和影响。
⑤ Bourgeois 2005
⑥布朗等2003：225
① Salamon 1994
②布朗等2003：227
③ Anheier et al 2001:21
④这些群体之所以被称为弱势,因为他们这些群体在原先制度内部缺乏发言权和发言能力,其权利和利益无法得到维护。
⑤布朗等2003：236
① "The core elements of civil society in his view, the non-stateliness of civil society, its autonomy towards public institutions, the market and the private sphere, its autonomous civic values, its decentralized characters and its link to the public-are conceivable for the European as well as for the national level". 见 Kaelble 2004,转引自Gudrun Eisele.2005: European civil society-a glance at recent literature.
②具体论述见Armstrong 2002, Bourgeois 2005
① "the sum of all organizational structures whose members have objectives and responsibilities that are of general interest and who also act as mediators between the public authorities and citizens "(EESC 1999,7.1)。
② -"the so-called labor-market players, i.e. the social partners;-organizations representing social and economic players, which are not social partners in the strict sense of the term;-NGOs (non-governmental organizations) which bring people together in a common cause,such as environmental organizations, human rights organizations, consumer associations,charitable organizations, educational and training organizations, etc.;-CBOs (community based organizations, i.e. organizations set up within society at grassroots level which pursue member-oriented objectives), e.g. youth organizations,family associations and all organizations through which citizens participate in local and municipal life;-Religious communities." (EESC 1999: 8.1)
③ Zimmer and Sittermann 2005; Zimmer 2007
④ Civil dialogue这一概念1996年由欧盟委员会的社会事务总司提出,强调社会部门中欧盟机构与NGo建立紧密对话伙伴关系的重要性。
① Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch 2001; Finke 2007, Zimmer and Sittermann 2005
② Zimmer and Sittermann 2005
① "a direct contribution to the'Action Plan for Better Regulation'" (Communication 2002:1.)
②原文为'facilitators of a broad policy dialogue" (Communication 2002)
③ as offering a good platform to change policy orientations and society... and (as) a real change to get citizens more actively involved in achieving the Union's objectives and to offer them a structured channel for feedback,criticism and protest" (Communication 2002)
④ Zimmer 2007
③原文为"the institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society" (EU Constitutional Treaty， Article Ⅰ-47)。
① http://ec.europa.eu/civil_society/interest_groups/definition_en.htm 于 2010-7-17。
②"activities carried out with the objective of influencing the policy formulation and decision-making processes of the European institutions", COM 2006: COM 2007。
③ COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION European Transparency Initiative, A framework for relations with interest representatives (Register and Code of Conduct), ｛SEC(2008) 1926}
①Wallace et al 2005:3
②科勒-科赫2006
③Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995
①科勒-科赫2003：282
②科勒-科赫2003：284)
③Kohler-Koch 2005c: 40
① Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1996:15-44; Maurer 2003:345
② Peterson 1995; Kohler-Koch 1999:14; Wessels 1997:269; Maurer 2003:346
③ Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995; Kohler-Koch 1999; Benz and Zimmer 2010
④科勒-科赫2006
⑤ Kohler-Koch 2006
① Finke 2007
② Hooghe and Marks 2001；Marks and Hooghe 1996
③ Neshkova 2008
④ Kohler-Koch 2005c: 39；Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2009
⑤ Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2009
⑧ Kohler-Koch 1996:371
①拉哈2004：119
②相关论述见Kohler-Koch 1999;吴志成2003;Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 2004:94; Kohler-Koch 2005c科勒-科赫2006：Zimmer 2007: Kohler-Koch 2008d
③ Marks and Hooghe 1996:18
④在这里,利益攸关者是一个更为宽泛的概念,指欧盟的政策规制执行会影响到的所有群体,包括公民社会行为体、专家、私人利益集团等,并非局限于政策的目标群体。
⑤ Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2009
⑥吴志成2003：40
① Kohler—Koch 1999；2005
② Kohler-Koch 2008d
③ Neyer2002
①科勒-科赫2005
②科勒-科赫2005
①见EESC的宣传彩页,http://www.eesc.europa.eu/groups/3/index_en.asp
② Warleigh 2003
① Andersen and Eliassen 2004
① Zimmer 2007
②他们受启蒙运动的影响,思想开明,比较自由。
① Zimmer 2007
② New Oxford American Dictionary (Second Edition, Erin McKean (editor), May 2005, Oxford University Press).
③ Wessels 1997
④ Zimmer 2007: Pankoke 2004
⑤ Utopian socialism.19世纪中叶的政治和哲学思潮。法国的夏尔·傅立叶(Charles Fourier)和圣西门(克劳德·亨利德鲁弗鲁瓦,圣西门伯爵Claude-Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon)英国的欧文(Robert Owen)为空想社会主义有名的代表,他们揭露了资本主义制度的罪恶,主张以新的和谐的互助的制度来代替资本主义制度。
⑥ Fabianism,英国的工人社会主义的派别,其主张重在务实的社会建设,倡导建立互助互爱的社会服务。
⑦ Anarchism,它的基本立场是反对包括政府在内的一切统治和权威,提倡个体之间的自助关系,关注个体的自由和平等；它的政治诉求是消除政府以及社会上或经济上的任何独裁统治关系。无政府主义的工联主义思想在西班牙和意大利的影响比较大。
⑧ Archaumbault 1997:20
① Kaelble 2004: Eisele 2005
① Kaelble 2004: Eisele 2005
① Kohler-Koch 2004
②“年代”(generation)这个概念比较有启发性,注重改变与持续性的共存,指的是事物发展的阶段性,新阶段是在前一时期取代的成就的基础上又加入了新的内容,有了新的发展。
③ Kohler-Koch et al 2006;Kohler-Koch and Finke,2007; Kohler-Koch,2008a
④ Kohler-Koch,2008a
① Kohler-Koch and Finke,2007；Nowicki,1996
② Kohler-Koch,2008a
③ Kohler-Koch and Finke.2007
④ Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007
① "Consultation, the European Commission and the Civil Society"的缩写,2001-2007年间欧盟委员会设立的与公民社会咨询有关的网站,2008年由新的登记系统代替。
① Gomlneyl986；Ringquist et al 2003；Neshkova 2008
② Helfferich and Kolb 2001
① Lehmann and Bosche 2003
② Promote the "autonomous input of other civil society organizations at a European, national, and local level, to the work of the European Institutions", "encourage and promote a transparent and structured civil dialogue that is accessible, properly facilitated, inclusive, fair, and respectful of the autonomy of NGOs"。见CSCG的主页,http://www.act4europe.org/code/en/default.asp。 2008-11-20。
③ The Platform of European Social NGOs是欧洲社会政策部门的非政府组织之间的联盟。见http://www.socialplatform.org/.26 December 2009 promote the interests of all blind and partially-sighted people in Europe")见http://www.euroblind.org/fichiersGB/orga.html.26 December 2009
① CEDAG是国家和地区性的公民社会联合会的网络组织,它“在欧洲层面特定议题上为非营利部门发出声音”("voice for the non-profit sector at the European level on specific issues")见http://www.cedag-eu.org/index.php?page=presentation&hl=en_US.26 December 2009
② Kaelble 2004:Eisele 2005
③ NaBmacher 2002:86; Weber 1977:216
④ Losche 2007; Leif and Speth 2006:64
①全权会员是活跃在公共健康领域的非政府组织,而协同组织则是其他非营利组织、专业团体、学术机构及区域性地方性的公共机构。http://www.epha.org/r/14, retrieved on 10 June 2009.
②这些数字是经过仔细审查EPHA的会员构成情况后确定的,见http://www.epha.org/r/14,10 June 2009.具体而言,在欧盟成员国中,拥有其会员的密集度最高的国家有：比利时18家,英国16家,法国7家。这表明欧盟范围内EPHA会员组织分布的不平衡。
③ http://www.env-health.org/r/27, retrieved on 11 June 2009.
④ http://www.env-health.org/r/103, http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/Brochure_HEA_003-06_OK.pdt; retrieved on 11 June 2009.
⑤ http://www.chemicalshealthmonitor.org/spip.php?rubriquel, retrieved on 11 June 2009.
⑥ http://www.env-health.org/r/145, retrieved on 11 June 2009.
① Kohler-Koch1997; Kohler-Koch 1999; Eising and Kohler-Koch 1999; Kohler-Koch 2005b
① "chosen intermediary between the EU institutions and organised civil society". http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.liai son-group.
② Kohler-Koch 1997; Hooghe and Marks 2001; Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 2003; Kohler-Koch 2005b; Nentwich 1996; Obradovic and Vizcaino2005; Eising 2005
③ Justin Greenwood是伦敦经济学院(LSE)知名学者,近年来主要研究领域是欧盟政策过程中组织起来的利益团体(organized interests)及其影响,其中包括经济协会和公民社会组织。
④ Greenwood 2003
①'the principle of participatory democracy'requesting the EU institutions "to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society" (CT Art.Ⅰ-47,2)
②宪法条约中具体条款英文原文为：
1. "The Union Institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views on all areas of Union action.
2. The Union Institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society.
3. The Commission shall carry out broad consultations with parties concerned in order to ensure that the Union's actions are coherent and transparent.
4. No less than one million citizens coming from a significant number of Member States may invite the Commission to submit any appropriate proposal on matters where citizens consider that a legal act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing this Constitution. A European law shall determine the provisions for the specific procedures and conditions required for such a citizens'initiative."
①里斯本条约相关条款原文：8A 3. "Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen."
8B"1. The institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action. 8B 2. The institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society."
① Greenwood 2003:27
① Steffek et al 2008:7;Kohler-Koch 2007
① Maurer 2003
② Tommel 2010
③ De Schutter 2002
① "Activities with the objective of influencing the policy formulation and decision making process of the European institutions" (COM 2006).
② Gudguen 2007:135; Charrad 2008
① lobby planet这个名称是由欧洲一公民社会组织一欧洲企业观察员(Corporate Europe Observatory, CEO)创造的,意为布鲁塞尔就像《孤独星球》这本旅游指南一样为“旅游者”提供路线。见Kristina Charrad.2008. Lobbying and European civil society.
② O'Connor 1997
① Lehmann and Bosche 2003
① 网址为http://europa.eu/
② http://ec.europa.eu/civil_society/accueil_en.htm
③ http://europa.eu/debateeurope/index_en.htm
④http://europa.eu/sinapse/sinapse/index.cfm?
① Krasner 1982; Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007
① Youne and Everitt 2004: Rektor 2002
② Cohen 2001
③ Because the member organization under a CSO is composed of individual citizens, or in other words their grassroots are individual citizens, we can say that this kind of organization also is indirectly made up of citizens, of course with some distance. So this membership can be defined as an indirect membership of individual citizens.
④ World Bank 1995; Holloway 1998
① Cammaerts 2006
① Fossum and Trenz 2006
① Peeters 2003
② Cammaerts 2006
③ Fossum and Trenz 2006；Fossum and Trenz 2005
①参见佩特曼,《参与和民主理论》：2006：22
① Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006; Kohler-Koch 2007,2008: Maloney and van Deth 2008:4
② Zimmer and Freise 2008:22
③ Warleigh 2001
① Mittag 2004,转引自伍慧萍 2008
② Warleigh 2001
③ Zimmer 2007
① Eisele 2005
② Warleigh 2001
③ Trenz 2009
④ Boerzel 2010；Pleines 2010；Sissenich 2010；Kutter and Trappmann 2010
⑤ Zimmer 2004:11
⑥参见Kohler-Koch 2008b;Kohler-Koch 2008c
①Sudbery 2003
②科勒-科赫2009
③科勒-科赫2009
④科勒-科赫2009
①参见Greenwood 2004:146
②相关论述见Abromeit 1998; Zimmer 2004; Finke 2007; Charrad 2005; Kohler-Koch 2008b;Kohler-Koch 2010
③ Trenz 2006
① Scharpf 1999:1
② Sudbery 2003
③佩特曼 2006
①Pitkin 1967:114,转引自Beate Kohler-Koch 2010。
② Eriksen and FoSSum 2008
③ Smismans 2004
④ Kohler-Koch et al 2004; March and Olsen 1989
①详见Rittberger 2007; Lord 2007; Pollack 2009; Benz 2008:Trenz 2009
② Kohler-Koch.2008b
③ Greenwood 2007; Nanz and Steffek 2005; Huller 2007; Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007; Friedrich 2007
① Dahl 1989: 115
② Tocqueville 1830,1963:199
③郇庆治2002
① Lane 2006; Heinelt 2005
②科勒-科赫2006
③这个名词见科勒-科赫2006
④见讨论文件《委员会与非政府组织》(The Commission and Non-Governmental Organisations)第7页(？) Dialogue between the European Commission and NGO is an important complement to the institutional process of policy-shaping. The specific value of these consultations derives from the Commission's right of initiative. Timely consultation with all stakeholders at an early stage of policy-shaping is increasingly part of the Commission's practice of consulting widely, in particular before proposing legislation, to improve policy-design and to increase efficacy. (COM 2003;2007)
① Group2a 2001
②参见Bouven 2004
① Dahl 1994
② nmmel 2010；Kohler-Koch 2007a,2007b；Kohler-Koch 2010
① Dahl 1956:149-151,转引自卡罗尔·佩特曼：《参与和民主理论》2006：14
[德]哈贝马斯.公共领域的结构转型.曹卫东等译,上海：学林出版社,1999：1990年版序言29.
[法]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神(上册),张雁深译,北京：商务印书馆,1978.
[古希腊]亚里士多德.政治学[M].吴寿彭译.北京：商务印书馆,1983.
[英]戴维·米勒,韦农·波格丹诺.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[G].邓正来,等译.北京：中国政法大学出版社,1992.
[英]洛克.政府论(下篇),叶启芳、瞿菊农译,北京：商务印书馆,1964.
鲍景华.市民社会基本概念梳理[J].中共四川省委省级机关党校学报,2004,3.
贝阿特·科勒-科赫.欧洲研究中的“治理转向”,马克思主义与现实,2007,4.
贝阿特·科勒-科赫.转型视角下的欧洲联盟治理,南开学报(哲社版),2006,1
贝娅特·科勒-科赫.欧洲治理的演变和转型.见俞可平主编.全球化：全球治理.社会科学文献出版社,2003.
贝娅特·科勒-科赫.三种欧盟概念及其对应的欧洲公民社会角色,德国研究,2009,3.
邓正来.市民社会与国家——学理上的分野与两种架构,邓正来、[英]亚历山大.国家
与市民社会：一种社会理论的研究路径,北京：中央编译出版社,1998：93.
法布里斯·拉哈.欧洲一体化史(1945-2004).中国社会科学出版社,2005.
付鹏,王宏禹.欧洲一体化进程中的治理理论及其模式,产业与科技论坛,2009,2.
何增科.市民社会概念的历史演变,中国社会科学,1994,5.
黑格尔.法哲学原理.商务印书馆,1996.
胡昕蕾.论欧盟治理结构的多元性,法制与社会,2008,2.
郇庆治.多重管治视角下的欧洲联盟政治,山东大学出版社,2002年6月.
霍志军.欧洲联盟决策机制的演进与改革.河北师范大学硕士论文,2005年5月.
克里斯多夫·尼尔.安德烈亚·伦斯考.欧洲治理的不同路径及其对国家制度的影响,南开学报(哲社版),2009,3.
赖纳·艾辛.欧洲化和一体化：欧盟研究中的核心概念,南开学报(哲社版),2009,3.
李佃来.葛兰西与当代市民社会理论传统,学术月刊,2004,1
李佃来.古典市民社会理念的历史流变及其影响,武汉大学学报(人文科学版),2007,5.
刘玉安.北欧福利国家剖析,山东大学出版社,1995年12月.
卢静,衡孝军.透析欧盟治理困境.国际问题研究,2008,2
罗伯特·基欧汉和约瑟夫·奈.全球化世界的治理,导言.载于约瑟夫·奈、约翰·唐
纳胡(主编).王勇等译.全球化世界的治理.北京：世界知识出版社,2003：1-38.
牛海彬.欧盟治理的变量与困境.现代国际关系,2004,7.
苏海龙.马克思市民社会概念的历史演变,学术探索,2007,1.
谭康林,公民社会组织对欧盟政策制定的影响——以生物技术政策为例,欧洲研究,2008,(6).
田也.浅析市民社会组织在欧盟治理中的作用.河北师范大学,硕士论文.2006年12月.
王瑞强.欧洲一体化进程中的治理机制探析,陕西师范大学硕士论文,2005年5月.
吴志成,李客循.欧洲联盟的多层级治理：理论及其模式分析,欧洲研究,2003,6.
吴志成,杨娜.战后欧洲治理机制的历史演进.马克思主义与现实,2008,3.
吴志成.欧盟超国家制度安排的政治合法性分析,国际政治研究,2008,4.
吴志成.欧盟治理与制度创新,马克思主义与现实,2004,6.
吴志成.欧洲多层级治理：理论及其模式分析,欧洲研究,2003,6.
吴志成.战后欧洲治理机制的历史演进,马克思主义与现实,2008,3.
吴志成.治理创新：欧洲治理的理论、历史与实践,天津人民出版社,2003.
伍慧萍.欧盟治理中的公共领域与市民社会[J].德国研究,2008,(3)
伍贻康.欧盟软力量探析—欧盟治理模式的效应评价,世界经济与政治,2008,7.
伍贻康.欧盟治理模式的特征和发展趋势.世界经济研究,2008,5.
夏群友.葛兰西的市民社会理论浅析.西安电子科技大学学报(社科版),2004,4.
徐静.欧洲联盟多层级治理的理论和实践—以结构基金的运作为例,华东师范大学硕士论文,2006年5月.
杨解朴.欧盟治理下社会伙伴的角色变化,欧洲研究,2007,5.
杨仁忠,市民社会概念的政治哲学解读及其学理价值,理论与现代化,2005,5.
俞可平.全球治理引论[J]；马克思主义与现实；2002年第1期.
袁柏顺、丛日云.17世纪“公民社会”概念辨析,辽宁师范大学学报(社科版),2001,6.
曾远英,西方公民社会理论的历史嬗变述评,前沿,2008,11.
詹·齐隆卡：欧盟扩大后的多边治理,南开学报(哲社版),2009(03).
詹姆斯·N·罗西瑙主编.没有政府的治理,张胜军、刘小林等译,江西人民出版社,2001年9月.
张康之,张乾友：市民社会演变中的社会治理变革,浙江学刊2009,6.
赵叶珠.胡世君.欧盟治理的新工具——开放式协调法的特点及应用.科学与管理,2009,2.
赵映诚,古希腊公民社会与公民精神,理论月刊,2005,5.
周国文.“公民社会”概念溯源及研究述评,哲学动态,2006,3.
朱德米.网络状公共治理：合作与共治.华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2004,3.
Abromeit,H.1998. Democracy in Europe:Legitimizing Politics in a Non-State Polity. New York.
Alemann, Ulrich von [Hrsg.].1999.:Burgergesellschaft und Gemeinwohl:Analyse, Diskussion, Praxis. Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
Alemann, Ulrich von.1996:Interessenverbdnde. Informationen zur politischen Bildung (Heft 253). Bonn:Die Bundeszentrale fur politische Bildung.
Anheier, Helmut K.1990: A Profile of the Third Sector in West Germany. In: Anheier, Helmut K. and Wolfgang Seibel (eds.).1990:The Third sector: comparative studies of nonprofit organizations.Berlin: de Gruyter. p.314-329.
Anheier, Helmut, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor.2001. Global Civil Society 2001. Oxford University Press.
Armstrong, Kenneth.2006.Inclusive Governance? Civil Society and the open method of co-ordination. In: Smithmans, Stijn (ed.) Civil Society and Legitimate European Governance. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar,68-86.
Armstrong, Kenneth.2002. Rediscovery Civil Society: the European Union and the White Paper on Governance. European Law Journal,Vol.8, No.1.
Baldini, Massimo, et al.2002:Targeting welfare in Italy: old problems and perspectives on reform. In Fiscal Stuties. Volume 23, Issue 1, P51-75.
Baradat, Leon.1997:Political Ideologies: Their Origins and Impact.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Benz, Arthur.2007. Accountable Multilevel Governance by the Open Method of Coordination? European Law Journal,13(4):502-522.
Benz, Arthur.2008. Entwicklung von Governance im Mehrebenensystem der EU: in: Ingeborg Tommel (Hrsg.) Die Europaische Union. Governance und Policy-Making, PVS Sonderheft 40/2007, S.36-57.
Benz,Arthur,2008.Der Moderne Staat: Grundlagen der politologischen Analyse. Munchen: Oldenbourg.
Benz, Arthur and Christina Zimmer.2010.The EU's competences:The'vertical' perspective on the multilevel system. Living Reviews in European Governance, Vol.5, No.1.http://www.livingreviews.org/lreg-2010-1.
Berkhout, Joost and David Lowery.2008.Counting organized interests in the European Union: a comparison of data sources. In: Journal of European Public Policy. Vol.15(4), 498-513.
Beyme, Klaus von.1980:Interessengruppen in der Demokratie. Bierhoff Jan and Jamal Shahin.2005. An Electronic Union? First Steps Towards a New Relationship between the EU and Civil Society. Workshop of CONNEX
Bobbio, Norberto.1996:Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction, trans. Allan Cameron (Cambridge:Polity Press).
Bode, Ingo & Adalbert Evers.2008:Literature Review on Civil Society, Citizenship and Civic Participation: The case of Germany. http://cinefogo.cuni.cz/index.php?&id_result =35726&l=0&w=15&id_out=722
Borzel, Tanja A.2010.Why you don't always get what you want: EU enlargement and civil society in Central and Eastern Europe. Acta Politica 45,1-10 (14 April 2010)
Bourgeois, Flore-Anne.2005.'European Civil Society':Analytical and Political, Problems in the Use of a Loaded Concept, paper prepared for the workshop'The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations', CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim, 14-15 October 2005.
Bouwen,Pieter.2004. Exchange Access Goods for Access: a comparative study of business lobbying in the European Union Institutions. European Journal of Political Research, Vol.43, Issue 3.
Bozzini,Emanuela.2007. Organized Civil Society and European Governance: Findings and Contributions to the State of the Art from the CIVGOV project. In: Freise, Matthias (ed.):.2008. European Civil Society on the Road to Success? Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Cammaerts, Bart.2006. The eConvention on the Future of Europe:Civil society and the Use of the Internet in European Decision—making Processes. Journal of European Integration, Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 225-245.
Charrad, Kristina and Gudrun Eisele.2005. Civil Society Actors from Central Eastern European Countries in European Network Governance. Paper for Workshop "The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations", CONNEX Research Group 4. MZES: October 14-15,2005.
Charrad, Kristina.2008: Lobbying and European Civil Society: Problems and perspectives of civil society actors from Visegrdd countries. In Matthias Freise(ed.).2008: European Civil Society on the Road to Success? Baden-Baden: Nomos.109-128.
Charrad, Kristina.2005. Lobbying the European Union. http://nez.uni-muenster.de/download/Charrad_Literaturbericht_Lobbying_mit_Deckblatt.p df
CrVICUS civil society index shortened assessment tool report for the case of Greece. http://www.access2democracy.org/files/CSI-SAT_Greece_Report.pdf. Accessed on 15 April 2009.
CIVICUS.2005:Civil Society without the Citizens, an assessment of Bulgarian civil society, CIVICUS civil society index report for Bulgaria. http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Bulgaria_Country_Report.pdf
Coen, David.1998:The European Business Interest and the Nation State: Large-firm Lobbying in the European Union and Member States. Journal of Public Policy (1998), 18:75-100. Cambridge University Press.
Coen, David.2007. Empirical and theoretical studies in European lobbying. In: Journal of European Public Policy. Vol.14(3),333-345.
Cohen, D.& R. de la Vega and G. Watson.2001:Advocacy for social justice. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press Inc.
Cohen, J.L.& Arato, A. (1994) Civil Society and Political Theory (New ed.):Boston MA:MIT-Press.
Cram, Laura.2005. Inventing the People: Civil Society Participation and the Enhabitation of the EU. paper prepared for the workshop'The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations', CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim,14-15 October 2005.
Crum, Ben and John Erik Fossum.2009. The Multilevel Parliamentary field: a framework for theorizing representative democracy in the EU. In:European Political Science Review, Vol.1, No.2, pp.249-71.
Curtin, Deirdre.2003. Private Interest Presentation or Civil Society Deliberation? A Contemporary Dilemma for European Governance. Social Legal Studies.2003; 12:55-75.
Dahl, Robert A.1989. Democracy and its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Dahl, Robert A.1998. On Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Dahl,Robert A.1994. A Democratic Dilemma: System Effectiveness versus Citizen Participation. In: Political Science Quarterly,109:23-24.
Dalton, Russell. J.2003. Politics in Germany (2nd edition). Scott-Foresman, Harper Collins.
De Nieuwe Dialoog.2006.CIVICUS Civil Society Index Report for the Netherlands. http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.e.a.hurenkamp/bestanden/Civil%20Society%20-%20Civ icus.pdf.15 May 2009
De Schutter,Olivier.2002. Europe in Search of its Civil Society. European Law Journal, Volume 8, Number 2, June 2002, pp.198-217(20).
Della Porta, Donatella.2007. The Emergence of European Movements? Civil Society and the EU. Paper presented at the plenary session of the CINEFOGO Network of Excellence. Mid-Term conference on European Citizenship-challenges and possibilities. Roskilde University, Denmark, June 1-3.
Dettling, Warnfried [Hrsg.].1976:Macht der Verbande-Ohnmacht der Demokratie? Munchen [u.a.]:Olzog.
Do-ghue, Freda, Anheier, Helmut K., and Lester M. Salamon.1999:Ireland. In: Salamon, Lester M., Anheier, Helmut K., et al.1999:Global Civil Society:Dimensions of the non-profit Sector. Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies.
Drucker, Peter F.1994:Managing the Nonprofit Organization:Principles and Practices. Collins.
Dudley, Geoffrey and Jeremy Richardson.1997. Competing Policy Frames in EU Policy Making: The Rise of Free Market Ideas in EU Steel Policy 1985-1996. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol. 1 (1997) N° 013;http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1997-013a.htm.
Eder,Klaus and Hans-Joerg Trenz.2007. In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger (eds).2007. Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union. Lanham:Rowman&Littlefield,165-181.
Ehin, Piret.2008. Competing Models of EU Legitimacy: theTest of Popular Expectations. Journal of Common Market Studies,Volume46,Number3.pp.619-640
Eisele, Gudrun.2005. European civil society--a glance at recent literature. Junior Research Group "European Civil-Society and Multilevel Governance". http://nez.uni-muenster.de/download/eisele_-_european_civil_society.pdf Eising, Rainer.2004. Multilevel governance and business interests in the European Union, Governance,17,(2):211-46.
Eising, Rainer and Beate Kohler-Koch.1999.Governance in the European Union: a comparative assessment. In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Rainer Eising (eds.).1999. The Transformation of Governance in the European Union, London: Routledge.
Eising, Rainer.2005:The access of business interests to European Union institutions: notes towards a theory, http://www.arena.uio.no/publications/working-papers2005/papers/ wp05_29.pdf
Eising, Rainer.2008: Interest groups in EU policy-making. http://europeangovernance.livingreviews.org/Articles/lreg-2008-4/.
Eriksen, Erik and John Erik Fossum.2004:Europe in Search of Legitimacy: Strategies of Legitimation Assessed. In: International Political Science Review. Vol.24(4), 435-459.
Eriksen, Erik O. (eds). How to Reconstitute Democracy in Europe? Proceedings from the RECON Opening Conference. RECON Report No 3.ARENA Report 8/07, Oslo, September 2007.
Eriksen, Erik O. and John Erik Fossum (eds).2010. What Democracy for Europe? Proceedings from the RECON Midterm Conference. ARENA Report No 3/10;RECON Report No 11.
Eriksen, Erik O. and John Erik Fossum.2007. Europe in Transformation. How to Reconstitute Democracy. RECON Online Working Paper 2007/01. www.reconproject.eu/projectweb/portalproject/RECONWorkingPapers.html
Eriksen, Erik O. and John Erik Fossum.2008. Reconstituting European Democracy.ARENA working paper No.01/08.
Esping-Andersen, GφSta.1990:The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge:Polity Press.
EU Research on Social Sciences and Humanities. Organised civil society and European governance, CIVGOV Final report.2007.
European Institute for Public Participation(EIPP). Public participation in Europe, An international perspective. June2009.
Finke, Barbara.2007. Civil Society Participation in EU Governance. Living Reviews in European Governance. http://www. Livingreviews.org/lreg-2007-2(10-04-2008)
Fishkin, James and Robert Luskin.2000. The Quest of Deliberative Democracy. In Michael Saward (ed.). Democratic Innovation. London: Routledge,1-20.
Flora,P(eds).1986. Growth to Limits:the western welfare states since world war II. Berlin: De Grueter.
Follesdal, A and Hix, S. (2005)'Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU'European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-02
Follesdal, Andreas and Simon Hix.2005. Why there is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-02, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-05-02.pdf
Fossum, John Erik, and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2005.The EU's fledgling society:From deafening silence to critical voice in European constitution making. Journal of Civil Society, Vol.2,Issue 1.
Fossum, John Erik, and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2006. When the people come in: Constitution-making and the belated politicization of the European Union. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-06-03,
Fossum, John Erik, and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2006. When the people come in: Constitution-making and the belated politicization of the European Union. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-06-03,http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-06-03.pdf.
Freise, Matthias (ed.):.2008. European Civil Society on the Road to Success? Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Friedrich, Dawid.2007. Old Wine in New Bottles? The Actual and Potential Contribution of Civil Society Organizations to Democratic Governance in Europe. RECON Online working paper 2007/08.
Goodsell, Charles T..1988:The Social Meaning of Civic Space: Studying Political Authority through Architecture. Lawrence:University Press of Kansas.
Gormley, W.1986:Regulatory issue networks in a federal system. Polity,18 (4), 595-620.
Grant, Ruth W. and Robert O. Keohane:2005. Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics. American Political Science Review (2005),99:1:29-43.
Greenwood, Justin.2002.Inside the EU Business Associations.Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Greenwood, Justin.2003.nterest Representation in the EU.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Greenwood, Justin.2007. Review Article:Organized Civil Society and Democratic Legitimacy in the European Union. British Journal of Political Sciences 37,333-357.
Greenwood, Justin.2007:Interest Representation in the European Union. Basingstoke [u.a.]:Palgrave Macmillan.
Habermas,Juergen.1996.Between Facts and Norms, Cambridge: Polity Press. Hans-Jorg Trenz.2006. Europaeische Offentliehkeit and die verspaetete Politisierung der EU.Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, Issue 1,117-133.
Heinelt,Hubert.2005.Zivilgesellschaftliche Partizipation im EU-Mehrebenensystem— ein Vergleich der Umwelt- und Verbraucherpolitik, in: Knodt/Finke (HG):Europaische Zivilgesellschaft. Konzepte, Akteure, Strategien. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag Sozialwissenschaften.273-289
Heinelt,Hubert.2007:Participatory Governance and European Democracy. In Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Heinrich, Finn and Mahi Khallaf.2005:Assessing civil society in Cyprus and across the world-the CIVICUS civil society index. In: Management in the Non-Profit sector: the role of civil society organizations in participatory democracy and reconciliation. Nicosia: Management Centre of Mediterranean.
Helander,Voitto.1999:Finland, in: Salamon, Lester M., Anheier, Helmut K., et al. 1999: Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the non-profit Sector. Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins Centre for Civil Society Studies.
Helfferich, B. and F. Kolb.2001.Multilevel Action Coordination in European Contentious Politics: The Case of the European Women's Lobby, in: Imig, D. and S. Tarrow (eds). Contentious Europeans, Rowman & Littlefield, Oxford.143-159.
Holloway, Richard.1998:Establishing and Running an Advocacy NGO (Handbook). Lusak: Pact Inc..
Holzhacker,Ronald.2007.Democratic Legitimacy and the European Union. In: Journal of European Integration. Vol.29(3),257-269.
Hooghe, Liesbet and Gary Marks.2001. Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.5 (2001) N° 11; http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2001-011 a.htm http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-06-03.pdf.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Beate Kohler-Koch 1995.The Transformation of Governance in the European Union. MZES Arbeitspapiere Arbeitsbereich III/Nr 11. Mannheim 1995.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Beate Kohler-Koch.1996. Governance in der Europaischen Union. Fragestellungen fur eine interdisziplinare Forschung, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 1996:37, Issue 3, p.537-556.
Jachtenfnchs, Markus, and Beate Kohler-Koch.1996:Regieren im dynamischen Mehrebenensystem. In Markus Jachtenfuchs and Beate Kohler-Koch(eds.):Europaische Integration. Opladen: Leske and Budrich, P.15-46.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Beate Kohler-Koch.2003. Governance and Institutional Development.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus.1997. Democracy and Governance in the European Union, in P. Jachtenfuchs, Markus; Thomas Diez and Sabine Jung.1998. Which Europe?:Conflicting Models of a Legitimate European Political Order. European Journal of International Relations, No.4.
Jordan, Lisa.2005:Mechanism for NGO Accountability. GPPi research paper series No.3.
Habermas, Jurgen.Faktizitat und Geltung:Beitrage zur Diskustheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtstaats, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag,1992.
Kaelble, H.2004. Gibt es seine europaeische Zivilgesellschaft? In Gosewinkel D. er tal. Zivilgesellschaft-national und transnational. Berlin:edition Sigma:267-284. Kaelble, Hartmut.2001.Wege zur Demokratie, Von der Franzosischen Revolution zur Europaischen Union.Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt (DVA), Stuttgart-Miinchen.
Kautto, Mikko.2003. Welfare in Finland in the 1990s. in Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. Issue 31:1-4.
Kenis, Patrick and Franz Traxler.2007:Belgium. In Traxler, Franz and Gerhard Huemer (eds.).2007:Handbook of business interest associations, firm size and governance: A Comparative Analytical Approach. Routledge. P.64-84.
Kingdon, J.W.1995. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, New York: Harper Collins.
Knodt, Michele and Barbara Finke.2003: Europaisierung der Zivilgesellschaften oder Europaische Zivilgesellschaft? Ein Tagungsbericht. Zeitschrift fur Internationale Beziehungen,Heft 2, S.413-420.
Kocka, Juergen.2002. Civil Society and the role of politics. In: Scher, Gerhard(eds).Progressive Governance for the XXI Century. Contribution to the Berlin Conference. Munich.27-35.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Rainer Eising. The Transformation of Governance in the European Union. London :Routledge,1999.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger.2006. The'Governance turn'in EU studies. In: JCMS:Journal of Common Market Studies,44:27-49.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Barbara Finke.2007. The Institutional Shaping of EU-society Relations:A Contribution to Democracy via Participation? Journal of Civil Society, Vol.3, No.3.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Rainer Eising (eds.).1999. The Transformation of Governance in the European Union, London: Routledge.
Kohler-Koch,Beate and Christine Quittkat, Vanessa Buth.2008. Civil Society Organizations under the Impact of the European Commission's Consultation Regime. Paper presented at the CONNEX Final Conference'Efficient and Democratic Governance in a Multi-Level Europe'workshop 5. Mannheim, March 6-8.
Kohler-Koch,Beate and Christine Quittkat.1999. Intermediation of Interests in the European Union. Arbeitspapiere-Mannheimer Zentrum fur Europaische Sozialforschung/ No 9. Mannheim.
Kohler-Koch, Beate et al.2006. Enhancing Multi-Level Democracy by Organizing Civil Society Input. Paper presented at the 20th IPSA World Congress, Fukuoka, July 9-13, 2006.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Vanessa Buth.2009.Civil Society in EU Governance? Lobby Groups like any other? TranState Working Paper,108. SFB 597. Staatlichkeit im Wandel.2009.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.1992:Interessen und Integration. Die Rolle organisierter Interessen im westeuropaischen Integrationsprozeβ. MZES-Arbeitspapiere Arbeitsbereich III/Nr 1. Mannheim.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.1997.Organized Interests in the EC and the European Parliament European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.1 (1997) N° 9; http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1997-009a.htm
Kohler-Koch,Beate.1999. Europe in Search of Legitimate Governance. ARENA Working Papers WP 99/27.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2000. Framing: the bottleneck of constructing legitimate institutions. Journal of European Public Policy 7:4.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2002. Interdependent Governance: Accountability and System Transition. Paper presented at the First Pan-European Conference on European Union Politics. Bordeaux.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2003. Interdependent European Governance, in: Beate Kohler-Koch (ed.):Linking EU and National Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2005a The Organisation of Interests and Democracy in the European union, paper prepared for the workshop'The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations', CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim,14-15 October 2005.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2005b. European governance and system integration. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-01, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov /pdf/egp-connex-C-05-01.pdf.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2005c.Network Governance within and beyond an enlarged European Union. In: Verdun, Amy and Osvaldo Croci(eds).2005. The European Union in the Wake of Eastern Enlargement, institutional and policy-making challenges. Manchester and New York:.Manchester university press.35-53.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2007a. Political Representation and Civil Society in the EU. Paper prepared for CONNEX Thematic Conference on Political representation. European University Institute Florence, May 25-26,2007.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2007b. The Organization of Interests and democracy in the European Union. In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger (eds.).2007:Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2008a. Does Participatory Governance Hold its Promises? Paper presented at the CONNEX Final Conference'Efficient and Democratic Governance in a Multi-Level Europe'. Mannheim, March 6-8.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2008b. Representation, Representativeness, and Accountability in EU-Civil Society Relations. Paper presented at the CONNEX Final Conference 'Efficient and Democratic Governance in a Multi-Level Europe'workshop 5. Mannheim, March 6-8.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2008c. Civil Society and Representation: is there a Hole in the Whole? Paper presented at the CONNEX workshop on Representation. EUI Florence, April 23-24 2008. http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-05-01.pdf.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2008d. Civil Society in EU governance-a remedy to the democratic accountability deficit? Concepts & Methods,2008:4, issue 1, p.3-6.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2008e: A Critical Appraisal of EU Governance. In Zhou Hong and Beate Kohler-Koch(eds.).2008:EU Governance Model. Beijing: Social Science Academic Press (China).P.73-87.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2009:The Three Worlds of European Civil Society-What role for civil society for what kind of Europe? Policy and Society. Vol.28, Issue 1. P.47-57.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2010. Civil society and EU democracy:'astroturf' representation? Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.17,Issue 1,100-116.
Kohler-Koch, Beate; Dirk De Bievre und William Maloney (Hrsg.) 2008. Opening EU-Governance to Civil Society. Mannheim: CONNEX Report Series Nr.5.
Kooiman, Jan.1993. Social-Political Governance:Introduction. In: Kooiman, Jan(eds). Modern Governance. New Government Society Interactions. London: Sage.1-9.
Koslowski, Peter and Andreas Follesdal (eds.).1997.Democracy and the European Union. Berlin: Springer.
Krasner, Stephen. D..1982. Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: regime as intervening variables. International Organization 36,2.
Kutter, Amelie and Vera Trappmann.2010.Civil society in Central and Eastern Europe: The mbivalent legacy of accession. Acta Politica 45,41-69 (14 April 2010).
Kv(?)rk, Geir Ove.2007: Organised Civil Society in the EU Constitution-making Process, in Fossum, John Erik, Philip Schlesinger and Geir Ove Kv(?)rk (eds). Public Sphere and Civil Society? Transformations of the European Union, ARENA Report' 2/2007.
Lane, David.2010. Civil Society in the Old and New Member States: Ideology, institutions and democracy promotion. In: European Societies, Volume 12, Issue 3,293— 315.
Lane, Jan-Erik.2000. The Public Sector: Concepts, Models and Approaches, London: Sage.
Larat, Fabrice and Thomas Schneider.2009. Trends and Patterns in Governance Research: what do the GovData tell us? In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Fabrice Larat(eds).2009. European Multi-Level Governance, contrasting images in national research. Cheltenham & Northampton: Edward Elgar.167-189.
Lee, Julian.2004. NGO Accountability: rights and responsibilities. Paper presented for the Annual Conference of the Program on NGOs and Civil Society (CASIN).19th October 2004.Geneva:Switzerland.
Lehmann,Wilhelm and Lars Bosche.2003. Lobbying in the European Union:Current Rules and Practices. Working Paper on Constitutional Affairs Series of Directorate-General for Research of European Parliament. Luxembourg.
Leif, Thomas und Rudolf Speth [Hrsg.].2006: Die funfte Gewalt: Lobbyismus in Deutschland. Bonn:
Levitt, T.1973. The Third Sector:New Tactics for a Responsive Society. New York: Amacom.
Liebert, Ulrike and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2009.Civil society and the reconstitution of democracy in Europe: Introducing a new research field. Policy and society. Vol.28, Issue 1.
Lipset, Seymour Martin.1960. Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. Garden City: Doubleday.
Lipset, S. M. and Stein Rokkan.1967. Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments. In: Lipset, S. M. and Stein Rokkan (eds.).1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments.New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, pp.1-64.
Lord, Christopher.1998. Democracy in the European Union. Sheffield Academic Press.
Lord, Christopher.2007. Parliamentary Representation in a Decentered Polity. In Beate Kohler-Koch and Berthold Rittberger (eds). Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union. Lanham: Rowman&Littlefield,129-156.
Losche, Peter.2007:Schadet Lobbyismus der Demokratie?-Verbande konnen den Staat entlasten. Kulturaustausch. No.2/2007.
Lottman, Herbert R.2002:Barcelona: The Translation Market in Spain's Trade Capital. Publishers Weekly,12/9/2002.
Magnette, Paul. 2001. European Governance and Civic Participation: Can the European Union be politicised? Jean Monnet Working Paper No.6/01, Brussels.
Mair, Peter and Jacques Thomassen.2010. Political representation and government in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy,17:1,20-35.
Mair, Peter.2005. Popular Democracy and the European Union Polity. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-03, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/ pdf/egp-newgov-C-05-03.pdf.
Majone, Giandomenico.2010.Transaction-cost efficiency and the democratic deficit. Journal of European Public Policy, Volume 17. Issue 2. Pages 150-175.
Majone,Giandomenico.1998.Europe's'Democratic Deficit':The Question of Standards. In: European Law Journal, Vol.4, No.1, pp.5-28.
Maloney, William A. and Jan van Deth.2008:The associational impact on attitudes towards Europe:a tale of two cities. In Maloney, William and Jan van Deth (eds.),2008: Civil Society and Governance in Europe from national to international linkages. Cheltenham, UK [u.a.]:Edward Elgar,2008.
March, James G and Johan P. Olsen.1989. Rediscovering Institutions, New York: Free Press.
March, James G and Johan P. Olsen.1995. Democratic Governance. New York: Free Press.
Marks, Gary, Liesbet Hooghe and Kermit Blank.1996. European integration from the 1980s: state-centric vs. multi-level governance. In: Journal of European Common Market, 34(3).
Maurer, Andreas.2003. Committees in the EU system: a deliberative perspective. In(?) Eriksen,Erik O., Christian Joerges and Jiirgen Neyer (Eds.) European Governance, Deliberation and the Quest for Democratisation. ARENA REPORT 2/03. Oslo/Florence.
Mavrikos-Adamou, Tina.2010. Challenges to democracy building and the role of civil society. In: Democratization, Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 514-533.
Mayntz, Renate [Hrsg.].1992: Verbdnde zwischen Mitgliederinteressen und Gemeinwohl. Gutersloh:Verl. Bertelsmann-Stiftung.
Mayntz, Renate.1993a. Governing Failures and the Problem of Governability: some comments on a theoretical paradigm. In: Kooiman, Jan(eds). Modern Governance. New Government Society Interactions. London:Sage.1-9.
Maytz,Renate.1993b. Policy-Netzwerke und die Logik von Verhandlungssystemen. In: Heritier,Adrienne (eds). Policy Analyse. Kritik und Neuorientierung (PVS-Sonderheft 24).
McLean, Iain and Alistair McLean.2009: The concise Oxford dictionary of politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mittag, Juergen.2004. Civil Society and European Integration: New Democratic Forces in the European Union? Paper for the conference "Interest groups in the 21st century in France and Europe.
Moeller, Kolja.2010. European Governmentality or decentralizd network governance? The case of European employment strategy. RECON Online Working Paper 2010/08, www.reconproject.eu/projectweb/portalproject/RECONWorkingPapers.html
Moravcsik, A. (2002)'In defence of the democratic deficit: reassessing legitimacy in the European Union'Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol.40, Issue 4.
Naidoo, Kumi (CIVCUS).2003:Civil Society Accountability:"Who Guards the Guardians? Speech on 3 April 2003.New York: UN.
Naβmacher, Hiltrud.2002:Politikwissenschaft (4. Auflage). Munchen, Wien: Oldenbourg.
Neshkova, Milena.2008:Local and Regional Interest and Democratic Representation in the EU. Paper presented at annual meeting of MPSA Annual National Conference, Hilton, Chicago,03 April 2008.
Neuhold, Christine.2005. The European Parliament: a venue for "civil society interests"? Contribution for Workshop "The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations", CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim,14-15 October 2005.
Newton, Kenneth.2001:Trust, Social Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy. International Political Science Review. Vol.22, Issue 2,201-214.
O'Connor, Bernard.1997. some basic ideas on decision making and lobbying in the European Union. Liuc papers no.47. Serie Impresa e Istituzioni. 3.Noevembre 1997.
Olsen, Johan P..1996. Institutional Design in Democratic Contexts. ARENA working paper 96/no.27.
Parkinson, John.2003. Legitimacy Problems in Deliberative Democracy. Political Studies. Vol.51,180-196.
Pasha,Mustapha Kamal and David Blaney.1998. Elusive Paradise:the promise and peril of global civil society. Altematives,Vol.23, No.4.
Peeters, Marguerite A.2003. The principle of participatory democracy in the new Europe:a critical analysis. Paper for the Conference on "Nongovernmental organizations: the growing power of an unelected few". American Enterprise Institute. June 11,2003.
Persson, Thomas.2007:Democratizing European Chemicals Policy: Do Consultations Favor Civil Society Participation? Journal of civil society, Vol.3, No.3. pp. 223-238.
Peters, B. Guy.1996. Is it the Institutions? Explaining the Failure of Health Care Reform in the United States. Public Policy and Administration,11,1, pp.8-25.
Pitkin, Hanna F.1967:The Concept of Representation. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Pleines, Heiko.2010.Is this the way to Brussels? CEE civil society involvement in EU governance.Acta Politica 45,229-246 (14 April 2010).
Pollack, Johannes et al.2009. On Political Representation, myths and challenges. RECON Online Working Paper, 2009/03, http://www.reconproject.eu/projectweb/ portalproject/RECONWorkingPapers.html
Pollak, Johannes et al.2009. On Political Representation, myths and challenges. RECON online working papers No.3
Powell, G. Bingham. Jr. 1976:Political Cleavage Structure, Cross-Pressure, Processes, and Partisanship: An Empirical Test of the Theory. American Journal of Political Science, Vol.20, No.1. pp.1-23.
Price, R.G 2004:redefining the political spectrum: the rational spectrum. http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/redefining_the_political_spectru.htm. Retrieved on 11 March 2009
Putnam, Robert D:1995.Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy 6:1, January 1995,65-78. p.3
Quittkat, Christine and Barbara Finke. 2008:The EU Commission Consultation Regime", in: Kohler-Koch, Beate, Dirk De Bievre and William Maloney (Eds.). 2008: Opening EU-Governance to Civil Society. Mannheim: 2008. [CONNEX Report Series / No.5].183-222.
Rein, M. and Schon, D..1991.Frame-Reflective Policy Discourse, in P. Wagner, C. Hirschon Weiss, B. Wittrock and H. Wollman (Eds), Social Sciences and Modern States, National Experiences and Theoretical Crossroads, Cambridge:University Press.
Rektor, Laurie.2002. Advocacy-The Sound of Citizen's Voices, A position paper from the Advocacy Working Group. http://www.ginsler.com/documents/sound_of_citizens_voices.pdf. Retrieved on 17.Febrary 2009.
Ringquist, Evan J., Jeff Worsham, and Marc Allen Eisner.2003:Salience, Complexity, and the Legislative Direction of Regulatory Bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13 (2):141-164.
Rittberger, Berthold.2009:The historical origins of the EU's system of representation. In:Journal of European Public Policy. Vol.16(1),43-61.
Roehrig, Johannes.2008. Bruessel en bloc, Lobbyisten bleiben undercover. In: Der Stern.04. Juli 2008.
Rosamond,Ben.2000. Theories of European Integration. Palgrave Macmillan. Follesdal A., and Simon Hix.2006:Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: A response to Majone and Moravcsik.in JCMS-JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES Vo1.44 Issue 3:533-562
Rosenau, James N. and Ernst-Otto Czempiel.1992.Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. Cambridge University Press.
Rudzio, Wolfgang.1982:Die organisierte Demokratie:Parteien und Verbande in der Bundesrepublik. Stuttgart:Metzler.
Ruzza, Carlo and Emanuela Bozzini.2008. Organised Civil Society and European Governance: Routes of Contestation. In: European Political Science. Jg.7, Heft 3, S. 296-303.
Ruzza, Carlo and Vincent Della Sala (eds.).2007:Governance and Civil Society in the European Union. Vol.1:Normative Perspectives. Manchester:Manchester Univ. Press.
Ruzza, Carlo.2005. EU Public Policies and the Participation of Organized Civil Society. Working Papers del Dipartimento di studi sociali e politici, Universita degli studi di Milano.2005-11-25. www.sociol.unimi.it
Sanchez-Salgado, Rosa.2007. Giving a European dimension to civil society organizations. Journal of Civil Society, Vol.3, No.3.
Saurugger, Sabine.2007. 《 Organized civil society 》 as a legitimate partner in the European Union. http://www.ceri-sciences-po.org.
Scharpf, Fritz.1999. Governing in Europe - Effective and Democratic? Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Scharpf, Fritz.1984. Economic and Institutional Constraints of Full-employment Strategies. Sweden, Austria, and Western Germany,1973-1982. In:Goldthorpe, John H. (Hrsg.).1984: Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism. Oxford:Clarendon Press, 257-290.
Schmid, Josef.2008:Wohlfahrtsstaat. In: Nohlen, Dieter and Florian Grotz (ed.). 2008:Kleines Lexikon. Bonn:Bundeszentrale fur politische Bildung. (2001. Munchen: Verlag CH Beck) P.643.
Schmidt, Vivien.2008. Discursive Institutionalism: the explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science.2008:11.
Schmitter, Philippe and Gerhard Lehmbruch. (ed.) 1979:Trends towards corporatist intermediation, Beverly Hills:Sage Publications.
Schmitter, Philippe C.1979:Modes of interest intermediation and models of societal change in Western Europe. in Schmitter, Philippe C. and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). 1979: Trends toward corporatist intermediation. London and Beverly Hills:Sage Publications. pp63-94.
Scigliano,Robert.1995. Representation. In Lipset, Seymour Martin(eds.) Encyclopaedia of Democracy. London:Routledge.1054-1058.
Scott, W. Richard.2001. Institutions and Organizations(2nd edition). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Sissenich, Beate.2010.Weak states, weak societies:Europe's east-west gap. Acta Politica 45,11-40 (14 April 2010).
Smismans, Stijn (Hg.).2006.Civil Society and Legitimate European Governance.
Smismans, Stijn.2006. New Modes of Governance and the Participatory Myth. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. N-06-01, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-newgov-N-06-01.pdf.
Smismans, Stijn.2000. The European Economic and Social Committee:towards deliberative democracy via a functional assembly. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.4 (2000) No.12.http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2000-012a.htm.
Smismans, Stijn.2002. "Civil Society" in European Institutions Discourses, Paper presented to the ECPR joint sessions, p.19-20.
Smismans, Stijn.2003. European Civil Society:Shaped by Discourse and Institutional Interests. European Law Journal,Vo1.9, No.4.
Smismans, Stijn.2004. Law, legitimacy, and European governance:functional participation in social regulation. Oxford [u.a.]:Oxford Univ. Press.
Sotiropoulos, Dimitri A. and Evika Karamagioli.2006:Greek Civil Society:The Long Road to Maturity.-2005. CIVCUS report.
Steffek, Jens and Patrizia Nanz.2007:Emergent Patterns of Civil Society Participation in Global and European Governance. In:Steffek, Jens et al. (eds.):Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance, A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? London:Palgrave:1-29.
Steffek,J. et al.2009. Assessing the democratic legitimacy of transnational CSOs:five criteria. TranState Working Paper, Bremen:SFB 597. Staatlichkeit im Wandel.2009.
Steffek,Jens and Stijn Smismans.2007. Civil Society participation in European Governance. NEWGOV Policy Brief No.11.
Sudbery, Imogen.2010. The European Union as political resource:NGOs as change agents? Acta Politica 45,136-157 (14 April 2010).
Takahashi, Mutsuko.2003:Transition in Welfare Model:The Case Study of Finland and Its Theoretical Implications on Welfare Model. Shimane journal of policy studies. -.6. pp.31-48.
Tocqueville, Alexis de.1835. De la democratie en Amerique, collection 10/18(Paris:1963).
Tommel, Ingeborg.2010. Civil society in the EU: a strong player or a fig-leaf for the democratic deficit? (Policy Brief).Canada-Europe Transatlantic Dialogue:Seeking Transnational Solutions to 21st Century Problems. March 2010. http://www.carleton.ca/europecluster.
Trenz, Hans-Jorg.2007. The imaginary of a European Civil Society. Paper presented at RECON WPS Kick-Off International Conference:"Reconstituting Democracy from below: New Approaches to Civil Society and the Public Sphere", Delmenhorst, May 17-19.
Trenz, Hans-Jorg.2009.European civil society: Between participation, representation and discourse. In: Policy & Society. Vol.28(1),35-46.
Vieler,Alexander.1986:Interessen, Gruppen und Demokratie, Eine sozialokonomische Untersuchung uber den Einfluss von Interessenverbanden auf wirtschaftspolitische Entscheidungen. Mohr Siebeck, Tubingen.
Vogel, Joachim et al.2003: Statistics Sweden-Associational Life in Sweden. (Living Conditions report-.101).
Warleigh, Alex.2001. "'Europeanizing" civil society: NGOs as agents of political socialization'. In: Journal of Common Market Studies 39(4):619-39.
Warleigh, Alex.2000.'The hustle:citizenship practice, NGOs and "policy coalitions" in the European Union-the cases of auto oil, drinking water and unit pricing'. In Journal of European Public Policy 7(2):229-43.
Warleigh,Alex.2003a. Democracy in the European Union: Theory, Practice and Reform.London:SAGE.
Warren, Mark E..2009. Citizen Participation and Democratic Deficits: Considerations from the Perspective of Democratic Theory. In: DeBardeleben, Joan and Jon Pammett(eds).Activating the Citizen: Dilemmas Of Participation In Europe And Canada. Palgave MacMillan.
Weber, Jurgen.1977:Die Interessengruppen im politischen System der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Stuttgart [u.a.]:Kohlhammer.
Weber, Max.1913. Economy and Society. California:University of California Press.
Webster,Ruth.2000. What drives interest group collaboration at the EU level? Evidence from the European environmental interest groups. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.4 (2000) N°17; http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2000-017a.htm.
Weiler, J.1995. Fundamental Rights and fundamental boundaries:on standards and values in the protection of human rights. Neuwhal, N. and A. Rosas.The European Union and Human Rights. The Hague, Kluwer:51-76.
Wessels, Bernhard.1997:Interest Groups and Political Representation in Europe. Paper presented at the joint sessions of workshops of the ECPR, Bern,27 February-4 March 1997.
White, Gordon et al.1999. Civil Society and Governance, a concept paper of project Civil Society and Governance funded by the Ford Foundation, http://www.ccss.pku.edu.cn/ccss/Html/xslw_zhl/223544324.htm1.2006-2-28.
Wiener, Antje.2007. Analysing Democratic Legitimacy Collaboratively. European Integration, Vol.29, No.3,381-385.
Williamson, Peter F..2004:Corporatism and Neocorporatist Theory. in Clive S. Thomas(ed.). Research Guide to U.S. and International Interest Groups. Westport, Connecticut:Praeger Publishers. P.48-53.
World Bank. 1995:"Working with NGOs: A Practical Guide to Operational Collaboration between the World Bank and Non-Governmental Organizations," Operations Policy Department, World Bank, p.29.
Young, L. And J. Everitt.2004. Advocacy groups. Vancouver, BC:UBC Press. P.5.
Zimmer, Annette and Birgit Sittermann.2004. Brussels Civil Society. Working Papers of ISTR Sixth International Conference "Contesting Citizenship and Civil Society in a Divided World". Ryerson University and York University, Toronto, Canada, July 11-14, 2004.
Zimmer, Annette and Birgit Sittermann.2005. Brussels Civil Society. ISTR Conference working papers series:http://www.jhu.edu/-istr/pubs.
Zimmer, Annette and Matthias Freise.2008. Bringing Society Back in: Civil Society, Social Capital, and Third Sector. In: Maloney, William A. and Jan W. van Deth. (eds).2008. Civil Society and Governance in Europe. From national to international linkages. Cheltenham & Northampton: Edward Elgar.19-44.
Zimmer, Annette.2007. Governance and Civil Society. http://www.nez.uni-muenster.de/download/Zimmer_Civ_Gov.pdf (Nachwuchsgruppe "Europaische Zivilgesellschaft und Multilevel Governance"-NEZ-Working Paper).
Zittlel, Thomas.2008. Participatory Engineering: Theoretical Assessment and Empirical Findings. in Kohler-Koch, Beate; Dirk De Bievre und William Maloney (Hrsg.) 2008. Opening EU-Governance to Civil Society. Mannheim:[CONNEX Report Series/Nr. 5. P.119-144.
European Commission (1997):Promoting the role of voluntary organizations and foundations in Europe. COM(1997)0241 final.
European Commission(2000). Consultation and participation of civil society. (Group 2a).Report of working group.
European Commission. Communication from the Commission of 2nd December 1992 "An open and structured dialogue between the Commission and special interest groups". OJ C 63,5/3/1993.
European Commission (2000):Discussion Paper "THe Commission and Non Governmental Organizations: Building a Stronger Partnership". COM(2000) 11 final.
European Commission (2001). European Governance—A White Paper. COM (2001)428fmal.
European Commission (2002a).Communication from the Commission "Towards a reinforced culture of consultation and dialogue-General principles and minimum standards for consultation of interested parties by the Commission ". COM(2002) 704 final.
European Commission (2002b).Communication from the Commission. European Governance: better regulation. COM(2002) 275fmal.
European Commission (2004). REPORT ON EUROPEAN GOVERNANCE (2003-2004). SEC(2004) 1153.
European Commission(2006). Green paper "European Transparency Initiative". COM(2006) 194 final.
European Commission(2006). White paper ON A EUROPEAN COMMUNICATION POLICY".COM(2006) 35 final
European Economic and Social Committee (1999). OPINION on The role and contribution of civil society organizations in the building of Europe. CES 851/1999.
European Economic and Social Committee (2000).OPINION on the Commission discussion paper. CES 811/2000.
European Economic and Social Committee(2001). OPINION on "Organized civil society and European governance: the Committee's contribution to the drafting of the White Paper". CES 535/2001
European Economic and Social Committee(2003). FINAL REPORT of the ad hoc group on "Structured cooperation with European civil society organizations and networks". CESE 1498/2003 fin.
EP.2008.EU lobbying under spotlight. In: Focus.20080414FCS26459.
European Commission.2007. Communication from the Commission. Follow-up to the Green Paper'European Transparency Initiative'. COM(2007) 127 final, on 21 March 2007.
Commission Staff Working Document.2007. Results of the Commission Consultation on the Green Paper'European Transparency Initiative'. SEC(2007) 360. on 21 March 2007.
European Commission,2007. Green paper Public access to document held by institutions of the European community, a review. COM(2007) 185 final.
European Commission,2008:Europe in figures-Eurostat statistical yearbook 2008.
② (Kooiman 1993:2)
③原文为：Governing, has to be organized in a way to "enhance the independent adaptive, reactive, and problem-solving capacities of societal actors, which means to motivate and to enable them to react purposefully at any moment of changing conditions" (Mayntz 1993:15:Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995).
① Kohler-Koch 2005
②基欧汉/奈 2003：11
③ Kohler-Koch and Eising 1999: 14；Kohler-Koch 2005
④罗西瑙2001：5
⑤转引自俞可平 2002。
① Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2006
②科勒-科赫2006
③吴志成2003：40
④这个名词能够较好地概括社会角色对于欧盟事务的参与机制,由科勒-科赫教授和齐特尔倡导和运用。见Zittel 2007; Kohler-Koch 2007
①见Finke2007
②相关的论述如Kohler-Koch 1999; Jachtenfuchs;吴志成2003；科勒-科赫2006;Zimmer 2007; Kohler-Koch 2008d
③拉哈2004：119
④ Kohler-Koch 1999
⑤ Kohler-Koch 2006
⑥对于公开协调方式这一治理方式的“软”特性的论述,见Bierhoff and Shahin 2005;Smismans 2006; Benz 2007; Brandson 2008; Moeller 2010; de la Porte and Nanz 2007; March and Olsen 2008:192。
① Finke 2007；Zimmer 2007；Zimmer and Sittermann 2005;Peeters 2003;Kohler-Koch 2005:2008b
② Zimmer 2007;Saurugger 2007
③ March and Olsen1995:2
①这些指标是罗伯特·达尔在他的著作On Democracy和Democracy and its Critics中提出的,原文为“Before a policy is adopted, all the members the of the association must have equal and effective opportunities for making their views about should-be policy known to the other members.When the decision finally being made, every member must have an equal and effective opportunity to vote, and all votes must be counted as equal. Within reasonable limits as to time, each member must have equal and effective opportunities for learning about the relevant alternative policies and their likely consequences. The members must have the exclusive opportunity to decide how and, if they choose, what matters are to be placed on the agenda. Thus the democratic process required by the... preceding criteria is never dosed. The policies of the association are always open to change by the members, if they so choose. All, or at any rate most, adult permanent residents should have the full rights of citizens that are implied by the first four criteria."需要强调的是平等有效的机会 (equal and effective opportunities)在整个过程中非常重要。见Dahl 1989:37
② Jachtenfuchs 1997
③ Jachtenfuchs 1997
④ Hueller and Kohler-Koch 2008: Hueller 2008
⑤ "Europa erscheint uns als Hort der Demokratie". In Hartmut Kaelble.2001:Wege Zur Demokratie,von der Franzoesischen Revolution zur Europaeische Union.
⑥ Lipset 1960:77
⑦ Jachtenfuchs 1997; Jachtenfuchs, Diez and Jung 1998; Smismans 2004
① Beetham 1991
② Jachtenfuchs, Diez and Jung 1998; Parkinson 2003
③ Kohler-Koch et al 2004
④原文‘'Das Demokratiedefizit der Europaeische Union ist zu eineim Dauervorwurf an die Bruesseler Kommissare geworden".In Kaelble.2001. Wege Zur Demokratie,von der Franzoesischen Revolution zur Europaeische Union.
⑤相关的论述如Majone1998;Lord 2003; Follesdal and Hix 2005;Holzhacker 2007; Wiener 2007; Ehin 2008; Eriksen and Fossum 2010; Majone 2010.
⑥原文为"the growing democratic expectations that came with political integration, combined with institutions—he European Parliament in particular—hat can and should be measured according to democratic norms. "见 Warren 2009。
① Schardf 1999
② Follesdal and Hix2005
③ Mair and Thomassen 2010
④ Zimmner 2007
⑤ Habermas 1992; Zimmer 2007
①相关论述见Abromeit 1998; Lord 1998; Weiler 1995; Kohler-Koch 1999
②来自欧盟官方网站对民主赤字的术语解释。原文为：The democratic deficit is a concept invoked principally in the argument that the European Union and its various bodies suffer from a lack of democracy and seem inaccessible to the ordinary citizen because their method of operating is so complex. The view is that the Community institutional set-up is dominated by an institution combining legislative and government powers (the Council of the European Union) and an institution that lacks democratic legitimacy (the European Commission).At every stage of the European integration process, the question of democratic legitimacy has become increasingly sensitive. The Maastricht, Amsterdam and Nice Treaties have triggered the inclusion of the principle of democratic legitimacy within the institutional system by reinforcing the powers of Parliament with regard to the appointment and control of the Commission and successively extending the scope of the co-decision procedure. 见 http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/democratic_deficit_en.htm
③ Warleigh 2003:2
④ Armstrong 2002
⑤ Maloney and van Deth 2008:3
⑥ Peeters 2003
⑦见http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/democratic_deficit_en.htm
① Smismans 2007
② polycentric system of directly-deliberative polyarchy, or what is the same,'as a multilevel, large-scale and multi-perspectival polity based on the notions of a disaggregated democratic subject and patterns of diverse and dispersed democratic authority'.Erik Oddvar Eriksen and John Erik Fossum. Europe's Challenge: Reconstituting Europe or Reconstituting Democracy?, http://www.reconproject.eu/main.php/EriksenFossum Paper RECONworkshop Mar09.pdf?fileitem=5423278>
③ Weber 1913
④ Zimmer 2007
⑤ Zimmer and Sittermann 2005
⑥ Kohler-Koch 1999,2008;Zimmer 2007
①见英文版《里斯本条约》(Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community).
②伍慧萍2008
③ Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch 2007
④ Peeters 2003:Zimmer and Sittermann 2005; Zimmer 2007; Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch 2005,2008b,2010
⑤见德国曼海姆大学图书馆网站。
①见网站ISI web of knowledge.
②指European Framework Programme,是欧盟委员会对于科学研究的资助和支持计划,每4年为一个周期。自从1994年的第4次框架计划开始,对于人文和社会科学方面的研究进入欧盟资助的范围。在从1994到2006年间,受到资助的有关欧盟治理(EU governance)的课题为73项,参与课题研究的大学和科研机构751家,资助总额仅第5、6次计划就接近6300万欧元(数据见Larat and Schneider 2009, Trends and Patterns in Governance Research).
③ Zimmer 2007; Zimmer and Freise 2008:20
④ Zimmer 2007
⑤ Flora 1986
① Rosenau and Czempiel 1992
.Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995
③科勒-科赫2005
④科勒-科赫2003：282
⑤科勒-科赫2006
⑥ Consortia英文原意为大财团、大鳄。而布鲁塞尔的公民社会组织由于规模比较大,涵盖了诸多组织、会员总数也就非常可观,因而,称之为公民社会中的大鳄也不为过。
① Eisele 2005;Peeters 2003
② Greenwood 2007; Ruzza 2004
③ Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006
① Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007;Kohler-Koch 2008b;2008c; 2010
② Della Porta 2007: Ruzza 2004; Ruzza 2007; Ruzza 2005
③ Sudbery 2010
④ Finke 2007
⑤ Eising 2007;Steffek and Smismans 2007
⑥ Ruzza and Bozzini 2008; Bozzini 2007
⑦ Steffek and Nanz 2007
⑧ Lane 2010, Pleines 2010; Sissenich 2010; Kutter and Trappmann 2010
⑨ Zittel 2008; Kohler-Koch, De Bievre and Maloney 2008
①"Arguing other than bargaining", arguing与bargaining的区别在于,arguing是一个经过协商达成共识的过程,而bargaining则是零和游戏,是参与者对利益分配的讨价还价,A之得即是B之失。
② Kohler-Koch 1997: Kohler-Koch 2005b
③ Smismans 2003
④ Sanchez-Salgado 2007
⑤ Quittkat and Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch and Buth 2009; Persson 2007; Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006.
Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007
⑥ Fossum and Trenz 2006
⑦ Heinelt 2007; De Schutter 2002
⑧ Liebert and Trenz 2009
⑨ Rittbereer 2009:Trenz2009
⑩ Greenwood 2007
11 Mavrikos-Adamou2010
12 Friedrich 2007; Hueller 2008; Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006
13 Kohler-Koch2007a;Kohler-Koch 2007b
①最主要的是科勒-科赫教授对此方面的研究。见Kohler-Koch 2002; 2006;2007a;2007b;2008b;2008c;2008d;2009; 2010
① Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2006:28
② Mayntz 2004;Zimmer 2007; Finke 2007
③见欧盟官方网站对欧盟治理条目的术语解释。http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/governance_en.htm
① James G March and Johan P. Olsen.2005.Elaborating the new Institutionalism. ARENA Working paper No.11 1对于新制度主义的论述还可见于March and Olsen 1989,1995,2006；Kohler-Koch 2005c.
①科勒-科赫2006
② Habermas 1996: 359, Between Facts and Norms, Cambridge: Polity Press.
③ Habermas 1996: 367
①有关参与式民主的详细论述见Zittel and Fuchs 2007;Finke 2007
① Pitkin 1967:9
② Pollak et al 2009
③ Eriksen and Fossum 2008
④ Smismans 2004
⑤ Kohler-Koch et al 2004
⑥Kohler-Koch 2008c；Kohler-Koch 2008d
①邓正来1998：93
②孟德斯鸠1978：159
③孟德斯鸠1978：179
④黑格尔1996：289
① Habermas 1992:443
② Cohen & Arato 1994
③ Kocka 2002:16
④见Zimmer 2007.安奈特·季默女士(Annette Zimmer)是德国明斯特大学教授,任职于社会政策和政治学系,是国际第三部门学会的主席团成员(International Society of Third Sector Research, ISTR)。主要研究方向为非盈利部门、公民社会等,领衔多项有关第三部门、非盈利组织与欧盟治理研究课题,其作品在欧盟治理和公民社会领域有一定地位和影响。
⑤ Bourgeois 2005
⑥布朗等2003：225
① Salamon 1994
②布朗等2003：227
③ Anheier et al 2001:21
④这些群体之所以被称为弱势,因为他们这些群体在原先制度内部缺乏发言权和发言能力,其权利和利益无法得到维护。
⑤布朗等2003：236
① "The core elements of civil society in his view, the non-stateliness of civil society, its autonomy towards public institutions, the market and the private sphere, its autonomous civic values, its decentralized characters and its link to the public-are conceivable for the European as well as for the national level". 见 Kaelble 2004,转引自Gudrun Eisele.2005: European civil society-a glance at recent literature.
②具体论述见Armstrong 2002, Bourgeois 2005
① "the sum of all organizational structures whose members have objectives and responsibilities that are of general interest and who also act as mediators between the public authorities and citizens "(EESC 1999,7.1)。
② -"the so-called labor-market players, i.e. the social partners;-organizations representing social and economic players, which are not social partners in the strict sense of the term;-NGOs (non-governmental organizations) which bring people together in a common cause,such as environmental organizations, human rights organizations, consumer associations,charitable organizations, educational and training organizations, etc.;-CBOs (community based organizations, i.e. organizations set up within society at grassroots level which pursue member-oriented objectives), e.g. youth organizations,family associations and all organizations through which citizens participate in local and municipal life;-Religious communities." (EESC 1999: 8.1)
③ Zimmer and Sittermann 2005; Zimmer 2007
④ Civil dialogue这一概念1996年由欧盟委员会的社会事务总司提出,强调社会部门中欧盟机构与NGo建立紧密对话伙伴关系的重要性。
① Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007; Kohler-Koch 2001; Finke 2007, Zimmer and Sittermann 2005
② Zimmer and Sittermann 2005
① "a direct contribution to the'Action Plan for Better Regulation'" (Communication 2002:1.)
②原文为'facilitators of a broad policy dialogue" (Communication 2002)
③ as offering a good platform to change policy orientations and society... and (as) a real change to get citizens more actively involved in achieving the Union's objectives and to offer them a structured channel for feedback,criticism and protest" (Communication 2002)
④ Zimmer 2007
③原文为"the institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society" (EU Constitutional Treaty， Article Ⅰ-47)。
① http://ec.europa.eu/civil_society/interest_groups/definition_en.htm 于 2010-7-17。
②"activities carried out with the objective of influencing the policy formulation and decision-making processes of the European institutions", COM 2006: COM 2007。
③ COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION European Transparency Initiative, A framework for relations with interest representatives (Register and Code of Conduct), ｛SEC(2008) 1926}
①Wallace et al 2005:3
②科勒-科赫2006
③Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995
①科勒-科赫2003：282
②科勒-科赫2003：284)
③Kohler-Koch 2005c: 40
① Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1996:15-44; Maurer 2003:345
② Peterson 1995; Kohler-Koch 1999:14; Wessels 1997:269; Maurer 2003:346
③ Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 1995; Kohler-Koch 1999; Benz and Zimmer 2010
④科勒-科赫2006
⑤ Kohler-Koch 2006
① Finke 2007
② Hooghe and Marks 2001；Marks and Hooghe 1996
③ Neshkova 2008
④ Kohler-Koch 2005c: 39；Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2009
⑤ Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2009
⑧ Kohler-Koch 1996:371
①拉哈2004：119
②相关论述见Kohler-Koch 1999;吴志成2003;Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 2004:94; Kohler-Koch 2005c科勒-科赫2006：Zimmer 2007: Kohler-Koch 2008d
③ Marks and Hooghe 1996:18
④在这里,利益攸关者是一个更为宽泛的概念,指欧盟的政策规制执行会影响到的所有群体,包括公民社会行为体、专家、私人利益集团等,并非局限于政策的目标群体。
⑤ Kohler-Koch and Rittberger 2009
⑥吴志成2003：40
① Kohler—Koch 1999；2005
② Kohler-Koch 2008d
③ Neyer2002
①科勒-科赫2005
②科勒-科赫2005
①见EESC的宣传彩页,http://www.eesc.europa.eu/groups/3/index_en.asp
② Warleigh 2003
① Andersen and Eliassen 2004
① Zimmer 2007
②他们受启蒙运动的影响,思想开明,比较自由。
① Zimmer 2007
② New Oxford American Dictionary (Second Edition, Erin McKean (editor), May 2005, Oxford University Press).
③ Wessels 1997
④ Zimmer 2007: Pankoke 2004
⑤ Utopian socialism.19世纪中叶的政治和哲学思潮。法国的夏尔·傅立叶(Charles Fourier)和圣西门(克劳德·亨利德鲁弗鲁瓦,圣西门伯爵Claude-Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon)英国的欧文(Robert Owen)为空想社会主义有名的代表,他们揭露了资本主义制度的罪恶,主张以新的和谐的互助的制度来代替资本主义制度。
⑥ Fabianism,英国的工人社会主义的派别,其主张重在务实的社会建设,倡导建立互助互爱的社会服务。
⑦ Anarchism,它的基本立场是反对包括政府在内的一切统治和权威,提倡个体之间的自助关系,关注个体的自由和平等；它的政治诉求是消除政府以及社会上或经济上的任何独裁统治关系。无政府主义的工联主义思想在西班牙和意大利的影响比较大。
⑧ Archaumbault 1997:20
① Kaelble 2004: Eisele 2005
① Kaelble 2004: Eisele 2005
① Kohler-Koch 2004
②“年代”(generation)这个概念比较有启发性,注重改变与持续性的共存,指的是事物发展的阶段性,新阶段是在前一时期取代的成就的基础上又加入了新的内容,有了新的发展。
③ Kohler-Koch et al 2006;Kohler-Koch and Finke,2007; Kohler-Koch,2008a
④ Kohler-Koch,2008a
① Kohler-Koch and Finke,2007；Nowicki,1996
② Kohler-Koch,2008a
③ Kohler-Koch and Finke.2007
④ Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007
① "Consultation, the European Commission and the Civil Society"的缩写,2001-2007年间欧盟委员会设立的与公民社会咨询有关的网站,2008年由新的登记系统代替。
① Gomlneyl986；Ringquist et al 2003；Neshkova 2008
② Helfferich and Kolb 2001
① Lehmann and Bosche 2003
② Promote the "autonomous input of other civil society organizations at a European, national, and local level, to the work of the European Institutions", "encourage and promote a transparent and structured civil dialogue that is accessible, properly facilitated, inclusive, fair, and respectful of the autonomy of NGOs"。见CSCG的主页,http://www.act4europe.org/code/en/default.asp。 2008-11-20。
③ The Platform of European Social NGOs是欧洲社会政策部门的非政府组织之间的联盟。见http://www.socialplatform.org/.26 December 2009 promote the interests of all blind and partially-sighted people in Europe")见http://www.euroblind.org/fichiersGB/orga.html.26 December 2009
① CEDAG是国家和地区性的公民社会联合会的网络组织,它“在欧洲层面特定议题上为非营利部门发出声音”("voice for the non-profit sector at the European level on specific issues")见http://www.cedag-eu.org/index.php?page=presentation&hl=en_US.26 December 2009
② Kaelble 2004:Eisele 2005
③ NaBmacher 2002:86; Weber 1977:216
④ Losche 2007; Leif and Speth 2006:64
①全权会员是活跃在公共健康领域的非政府组织,而协同组织则是其他非营利组织、专业团体、学术机构及区域性地方性的公共机构。http://www.epha.org/r/14, retrieved on 10 June 2009.
②这些数字是经过仔细审查EPHA的会员构成情况后确定的,见http://www.epha.org/r/14,10 June 2009.具体而言,在欧盟成员国中,拥有其会员的密集度最高的国家有：比利时18家,英国16家,法国7家。这表明欧盟范围内EPHA会员组织分布的不平衡。
③ http://www.env-health.org/r/27, retrieved on 11 June 2009.
④ http://www.env-health.org/r/103, http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/Brochure_HEA_003-06_OK.pdt; retrieved on 11 June 2009.
⑤ http://www.chemicalshealthmonitor.org/spip.php?rubriquel, retrieved on 11 June 2009.
⑥ http://www.env-health.org/r/145, retrieved on 11 June 2009.
① Kohler-Koch1997; Kohler-Koch 1999; Eising and Kohler-Koch 1999; Kohler-Koch 2005b
① "chosen intermediary between the EU institutions and organised civil society". http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.liai son-group.
② Kohler-Koch 1997; Hooghe and Marks 2001; Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch 2003; Kohler-Koch 2005b; Nentwich 1996; Obradovic and Vizcaino2005; Eising 2005
③ Justin Greenwood是伦敦经济学院(LSE)知名学者,近年来主要研究领域是欧盟政策过程中组织起来的利益团体(organized interests)及其影响,其中包括经济协会和公民社会组织。
④ Greenwood 2003
①'the principle of participatory democracy'requesting the EU institutions "to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society" (CT Art.Ⅰ-47,2)
②宪法条约中具体条款英文原文为：
1. "The Union Institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views on all areas of Union action.
2. The Union Institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society.
3. The Commission shall carry out broad consultations with parties concerned in order to ensure that the Union's actions are coherent and transparent.
4. No less than one million citizens coming from a significant number of Member States may invite the Commission to submit any appropriate proposal on matters where citizens consider that a legal act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing this Constitution. A European law shall determine the provisions for the specific procedures and conditions required for such a citizens'initiative."
①里斯本条约相关条款原文：8A 3. "Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen."
8B"1. The institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action. 8B 2. The institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society."
① Greenwood 2003:27
① Steffek et al 2008:7;Kohler-Koch 2007
① Maurer 2003
② Tommel 2010
③ De Schutter 2002
① "Activities with the objective of influencing the policy formulation and decision making process of the European institutions" (COM 2006).
② Gudguen 2007:135; Charrad 2008
① lobby planet这个名称是由欧洲一公民社会组织一欧洲企业观察员(Corporate Europe Observatory, CEO)创造的,意为布鲁塞尔就像《孤独星球》这本旅游指南一样为“旅游者”提供路线。见Kristina Charrad.2008. Lobbying and European civil society.
② O'Connor 1997
① Lehmann and Bosche 2003
① 网址为http://europa.eu/
② http://ec.europa.eu/civil_society/accueil_en.htm
③ http://europa.eu/debateeurope/index_en.htm
④http://europa.eu/sinapse/sinapse/index.cfm?
① Krasner 1982; Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007
① Youne and Everitt 2004: Rektor 2002
② Cohen 2001
③ Because the member organization under a CSO is composed of individual citizens, or in other words their grassroots are individual citizens, we can say that this kind of organization also is indirectly made up of citizens, of course with some distance. So this membership can be defined as an indirect membership of individual citizens.
④ World Bank 1995; Holloway 1998
① Cammaerts 2006
① Fossum and Trenz 2006
① Peeters 2003
② Cammaerts 2006
③ Fossum and Trenz 2006；Fossum and Trenz 2005
①参见佩特曼,《参与和民主理论》：2006：22
① Kohler-Koch, Humrich and Finke 2006; Kohler-Koch 2007,2008: Maloney and van Deth 2008:4
② Zimmer and Freise 2008:22
③ Warleigh 2001
① Mittag 2004,转引自伍慧萍 2008
② Warleigh 2001
③ Zimmer 2007
① Eisele 2005
② Warleigh 2001
③ Trenz 2009
④ Boerzel 2010；Pleines 2010；Sissenich 2010；Kutter and Trappmann 2010
⑤ Zimmer 2004:11
⑥参见Kohler-Koch 2008b;Kohler-Koch 2008c
①Sudbery 2003
②科勒-科赫2009
③科勒-科赫2009
④科勒-科赫2009
①参见Greenwood 2004:146
②相关论述见Abromeit 1998; Zimmer 2004; Finke 2007; Charrad 2005; Kohler-Koch 2008b;Kohler-Koch 2010
③ Trenz 2006
① Scharpf 1999:1
② Sudbery 2003
③佩特曼 2006
①Pitkin 1967:114,转引自Beate Kohler-Koch 2010。
② Eriksen and FoSSum 2008
③ Smismans 2004
④ Kohler-Koch et al 2004; March and Olsen 1989
①详见Rittberger 2007; Lord 2007; Pollack 2009; Benz 2008:Trenz 2009
② Kohler-Koch.2008b
③ Greenwood 2007; Nanz and Steffek 2005; Huller 2007; Kohler-Koch and Finke 2007; Friedrich 2007
① Dahl 1989: 115
② Tocqueville 1830,1963:199
③郇庆治2002
① Lane 2006; Heinelt 2005
②科勒-科赫2006
③这个名词见科勒-科赫2006
④见讨论文件《委员会与非政府组织》(The Commission and Non-Governmental Organisations)第7页(？) Dialogue between the European Commission and NGO is an important complement to the institutional process of policy-shaping. The specific value of these consultations derives from the Commission's right of initiative. Timely consultation with all stakeholders at an early stage of policy-shaping is increasingly part of the Commission's practice of consulting widely, in particular before proposing legislation, to improve policy-design and to increase efficacy. (COM 2003;2007)
① Group2a 2001
②参见Bouven 2004
① Dahl 1994
② nmmel 2010；Kohler-Koch 2007a,2007b；Kohler-Koch 2010
① Dahl 1956:149-151,转引自卡罗尔·佩特曼：《参与和民主理论》2006：14
[德]哈贝马斯.公共领域的结构转型.曹卫东等译,上海：学林出版社,1999：1990年版序言29.
[法]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神(上册),张雁深译,北京：商务印书馆,1978.
[古希腊]亚里士多德.政治学[M].吴寿彭译.北京：商务印书馆,1983.
[英]戴维·米勒,韦农·波格丹诺.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[G].邓正来,等译.北京：中国政法大学出版社,1992.
[英]洛克.政府论(下篇),叶启芳、瞿菊农译,北京：商务印书馆,1964.
鲍景华.市民社会基本概念梳理[J].中共四川省委省级机关党校学报,2004,3.
贝阿特·科勒-科赫.欧洲研究中的“治理转向”,马克思主义与现实,2007,4.
贝阿特·科勒-科赫.转型视角下的欧洲联盟治理,南开学报(哲社版),2006,1
贝娅特·科勒-科赫.欧洲治理的演变和转型.见俞可平主编.全球化：全球治理.社会科学文献出版社,2003.
贝娅特·科勒-科赫.三种欧盟概念及其对应的欧洲公民社会角色,德国研究,2009,3.
邓正来.市民社会与国家——学理上的分野与两种架构,邓正来、[英]亚历山大.国家
与市民社会：一种社会理论的研究路径,北京：中央编译出版社,1998：93.
法布里斯·拉哈.欧洲一体化史(1945-2004).中国社会科学出版社,2005.
付鹏,王宏禹.欧洲一体化进程中的治理理论及其模式,产业与科技论坛,2009,2.
何增科.市民社会概念的历史演变,中国社会科学,1994,5.
黑格尔.法哲学原理.商务印书馆,1996.
胡昕蕾.论欧盟治理结构的多元性,法制与社会,2008,2.
郇庆治.多重管治视角下的欧洲联盟政治,山东大学出版社,2002年6月.
霍志军.欧洲联盟决策机制的演进与改革.河北师范大学硕士论文,2005年5月.
克里斯多夫·尼尔.安德烈亚·伦斯考.欧洲治理的不同路径及其对国家制度的影响,南开学报(哲社版),2009,3.
赖纳·艾辛.欧洲化和一体化：欧盟研究中的核心概念,南开学报(哲社版),2009,3.
李佃来.葛兰西与当代市民社会理论传统,学术月刊,2004,1
李佃来.古典市民社会理念的历史流变及其影响,武汉大学学报(人文科学版),2007,5.
刘玉安.北欧福利国家剖析,山东大学出版社,1995年12月.
卢静,衡孝军.透析欧盟治理困境.国际问题研究,2008,2
罗伯特·基欧汉和约瑟夫·奈.全球化世界的治理,导言.载于约瑟夫·奈、约翰·唐
纳胡(主编).王勇等译.全球化世界的治理.北京：世界知识出版社,2003：1-38.
牛海彬.欧盟治理的变量与困境.现代国际关系,2004,7.
苏海龙.马克思市民社会概念的历史演变,学术探索,2007,1.
谭康林,公民社会组织对欧盟政策制定的影响——以生物技术政策为例,欧洲研究,2008,(6).
田也.浅析市民社会组织在欧盟治理中的作用.河北师范大学,硕士论文.2006年12月.
王瑞强.欧洲一体化进程中的治理机制探析,陕西师范大学硕士论文,2005年5月.
吴志成,李客循.欧洲联盟的多层级治理：理论及其模式分析,欧洲研究,2003,6.
吴志成,杨娜.战后欧洲治理机制的历史演进.马克思主义与现实,2008,3.
吴志成.欧盟超国家制度安排的政治合法性分析,国际政治研究,2008,4.
吴志成.欧盟治理与制度创新,马克思主义与现实,2004,6.
吴志成.欧洲多层级治理：理论及其模式分析,欧洲研究,2003,6.
吴志成.战后欧洲治理机制的历史演进,马克思主义与现实,2008,3.
吴志成.治理创新：欧洲治理的理论、历史与实践,天津人民出版社,2003.
伍慧萍.欧盟治理中的公共领域与市民社会[J].德国研究,2008,(3)
伍贻康.欧盟软力量探析—欧盟治理模式的效应评价,世界经济与政治,2008,7.
伍贻康.欧盟治理模式的特征和发展趋势.世界经济研究,2008,5.
夏群友.葛兰西的市民社会理论浅析.西安电子科技大学学报(社科版),2004,4.
徐静.欧洲联盟多层级治理的理论和实践—以结构基金的运作为例,华东师范大学硕士论文,2006年5月.
杨解朴.欧盟治理下社会伙伴的角色变化,欧洲研究,2007,5.
杨仁忠,市民社会概念的政治哲学解读及其学理价值,理论与现代化,2005,5.
俞可平.全球治理引论[J]；马克思主义与现实；2002年第1期.
袁柏顺、丛日云.17世纪“公民社会”概念辨析,辽宁师范大学学报(社科版),2001,6.
曾远英,西方公民社会理论的历史嬗变述评,前沿,2008,11.
詹·齐隆卡：欧盟扩大后的多边治理,南开学报(哲社版),2009(03).
詹姆斯·N·罗西瑙主编.没有政府的治理,张胜军、刘小林等译,江西人民出版社,2001年9月.
张康之,张乾友：市民社会演变中的社会治理变革,浙江学刊2009,6.
赵叶珠.胡世君.欧盟治理的新工具——开放式协调法的特点及应用.科学与管理,2009,2.
赵映诚,古希腊公民社会与公民精神,理论月刊,2005,5.
周国文.“公民社会”概念溯源及研究述评,哲学动态,2006,3.
朱德米.网络状公共治理：合作与共治.华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2004,3.
Abromeit,H.1998. Democracy in Europe:Legitimizing Politics in a Non-State Polity. New York.
Alemann, Ulrich von [Hrsg.].1999.:Burgergesellschaft und Gemeinwohl:Analyse, Diskussion, Praxis. Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
Alemann, Ulrich von.1996:Interessenverbdnde. Informationen zur politischen Bildung (Heft 253). Bonn:Die Bundeszentrale fur politische Bildung.
Anheier, Helmut K.1990: A Profile of the Third Sector in West Germany. In: Anheier, Helmut K. and Wolfgang Seibel (eds.).1990:The Third sector: comparative studies of nonprofit organizations.Berlin: de Gruyter. p.314-329.
Anheier, Helmut, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor.2001. Global Civil Society 2001. Oxford University Press.
Armstrong, Kenneth.2006.Inclusive Governance? Civil Society and the open method of co-ordination. In: Smithmans, Stijn (ed.) Civil Society and Legitimate European Governance. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar,68-86.
Armstrong, Kenneth.2002. Rediscovery Civil Society: the European Union and the White Paper on Governance. European Law Journal,Vol.8, No.1.
Baldini, Massimo, et al.2002:Targeting welfare in Italy: old problems and perspectives on reform. In Fiscal Stuties. Volume 23, Issue 1, P51-75.
Baradat, Leon.1997:Political Ideologies: Their Origins and Impact.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Benz, Arthur.2007. Accountable Multilevel Governance by the Open Method of Coordination? European Law Journal,13(4):502-522.
Benz, Arthur.2008. Entwicklung von Governance im Mehrebenensystem der EU: in: Ingeborg Tommel (Hrsg.) Die Europaische Union. Governance und Policy-Making, PVS Sonderheft 40/2007, S.36-57.
Benz,Arthur,2008.Der Moderne Staat: Grundlagen der politologischen Analyse. Munchen: Oldenbourg.
Benz, Arthur and Christina Zimmer.2010.The EU's competences:The'vertical' perspective on the multilevel system. Living Reviews in European Governance, Vol.5, No.1.http://www.livingreviews.org/lreg-2010-1.
Berkhout, Joost and David Lowery.2008.Counting organized interests in the European Union: a comparison of data sources. In: Journal of European Public Policy. Vol.15(4), 498-513.
Beyme, Klaus von.1980:Interessengruppen in der Demokratie. Bierhoff Jan and Jamal Shahin.2005. An Electronic Union? First Steps Towards a New Relationship between the EU and Civil Society. Workshop of CONNEX
Bobbio, Norberto.1996:Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction, trans. Allan Cameron (Cambridge:Polity Press).
Bode, Ingo & Adalbert Evers.2008:Literature Review on Civil Society, Citizenship and Civic Participation: The case of Germany. http://cinefogo.cuni.cz/index.php?&id_result =35726&l=0&w=15&id_out=722
Borzel, Tanja A.2010.Why you don't always get what you want: EU enlargement and civil society in Central and Eastern Europe. Acta Politica 45,1-10 (14 April 2010)
Bourgeois, Flore-Anne.2005.'European Civil Society':Analytical and Political, Problems in the Use of a Loaded Concept, paper prepared for the workshop'The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations', CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim, 14-15 October 2005.
Bouwen,Pieter.2004. Exchange Access Goods for Access: a comparative study of business lobbying in the European Union Institutions. European Journal of Political Research, Vol.43, Issue 3.
Bozzini,Emanuela.2007. Organized Civil Society and European Governance: Findings and Contributions to the State of the Art from the CIVGOV project. In: Freise, Matthias (ed.):.2008. European Civil Society on the Road to Success? Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Cammaerts, Bart.2006. The eConvention on the Future of Europe:Civil society and the Use of the Internet in European Decision—making Processes. Journal of European Integration, Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 225-245.
Charrad, Kristina and Gudrun Eisele.2005. Civil Society Actors from Central Eastern European Countries in European Network Governance. Paper for Workshop "The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations", CONNEX Research Group 4. MZES: October 14-15,2005.
Charrad, Kristina.2008: Lobbying and European Civil Society: Problems and perspectives of civil society actors from Visegrdd countries. In Matthias Freise(ed.).2008: European Civil Society on the Road to Success? Baden-Baden: Nomos.109-128.
Charrad, Kristina.2005. Lobbying the European Union. http://nez.uni-muenster.de/download/Charrad_Literaturbericht_Lobbying_mit_Deckblatt.p df
CrVICUS civil society index shortened assessment tool report for the case of Greece. http://www.access2democracy.org/files/CSI-SAT_Greece_Report.pdf. Accessed on 15 April 2009.
CIVICUS.2005:Civil Society without the Citizens, an assessment of Bulgarian civil society, CIVICUS civil society index report for Bulgaria. http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Bulgaria_Country_Report.pdf
Coen, David.1998:The European Business Interest and the Nation State: Large-firm Lobbying in the European Union and Member States. Journal of Public Policy (1998), 18:75-100. Cambridge University Press.
Coen, David.2007. Empirical and theoretical studies in European lobbying. In: Journal of European Public Policy. Vol.14(3),333-345.
Cohen, D.& R. de la Vega and G. Watson.2001:Advocacy for social justice. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press Inc.
Cohen, J.L.& Arato, A. (1994) Civil Society and Political Theory (New ed.):Boston MA:MIT-Press.
Cram, Laura.2005. Inventing the People: Civil Society Participation and the Enhabitation of the EU. paper prepared for the workshop'The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations', CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim,14-15 October 2005.
Crum, Ben and John Erik Fossum.2009. The Multilevel Parliamentary field: a framework for theorizing representative democracy in the EU. In:European Political Science Review, Vol.1, No.2, pp.249-71.
Curtin, Deirdre.2003. Private Interest Presentation or Civil Society Deliberation? A Contemporary Dilemma for European Governance. Social Legal Studies.2003; 12:55-75.
Dahl, Robert A.1989. Democracy and its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Dahl, Robert A.1998. On Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Dahl,Robert A.1994. A Democratic Dilemma: System Effectiveness versus Citizen Participation. In: Political Science Quarterly,109:23-24.
Dalton, Russell. J.2003. Politics in Germany (2nd edition). Scott-Foresman, Harper Collins.
De Nieuwe Dialoog.2006.CIVICUS Civil Society Index Report for the Netherlands. http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.e.a.hurenkamp/bestanden/Civil%20Society%20-%20Civ icus.pdf.15 May 2009
De Schutter,Olivier.2002. Europe in Search of its Civil Society. European Law Journal, Volume 8, Number 2, June 2002, pp.198-217(20).
Della Porta, Donatella.2007. The Emergence of European Movements? Civil Society and the EU. Paper presented at the plenary session of the CINEFOGO Network of Excellence. Mid-Term conference on European Citizenship-challenges and possibilities. Roskilde University, Denmark, June 1-3.
Dettling, Warnfried [Hrsg.].1976:Macht der Verbande-Ohnmacht der Demokratie? Munchen [u.a.]:Olzog.
Do-ghue, Freda, Anheier, Helmut K., and Lester M. Salamon.1999:Ireland. In: Salamon, Lester M., Anheier, Helmut K., et al.1999:Global Civil Society:Dimensions of the non-profit Sector. Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies.
Drucker, Peter F.1994:Managing the Nonprofit Organization:Principles and Practices. Collins.
Dudley, Geoffrey and Jeremy Richardson.1997. Competing Policy Frames in EU Policy Making: The Rise of Free Market Ideas in EU Steel Policy 1985-1996. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol. 1 (1997) N° 013;http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1997-013a.htm.
Eder,Klaus and Hans-Joerg Trenz.2007. In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger (eds).2007. Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union. Lanham:Rowman&Littlefield,165-181.
Ehin, Piret.2008. Competing Models of EU Legitimacy: theTest of Popular Expectations. Journal of Common Market Studies,Volume46,Number3.pp.619-640
Eisele, Gudrun.2005. European civil society--a glance at recent literature. Junior Research Group "European Civil-Society and Multilevel Governance". http://nez.uni-muenster.de/download/eisele_-_european_civil_society.pdf Eising, Rainer.2004. Multilevel governance and business interests in the European Union, Governance,17,(2):211-46.
Eising, Rainer and Beate Kohler-Koch.1999.Governance in the European Union: a comparative assessment. In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Rainer Eising (eds.).1999. The Transformation of Governance in the European Union, London: Routledge.
Eising, Rainer.2005:The access of business interests to European Union institutions: notes towards a theory, http://www.arena.uio.no/publications/working-papers2005/papers/ wp05_29.pdf
Eising, Rainer.2008: Interest groups in EU policy-making. http://europeangovernance.livingreviews.org/Articles/lreg-2008-4/.
Eriksen, Erik and John Erik Fossum.2004:Europe in Search of Legitimacy: Strategies of Legitimation Assessed. In: International Political Science Review. Vol.24(4), 435-459.
Eriksen, Erik O. (eds). How to Reconstitute Democracy in Europe? Proceedings from the RECON Opening Conference. RECON Report No 3.ARENA Report 8/07, Oslo, September 2007.
Eriksen, Erik O. and John Erik Fossum (eds).2010. What Democracy for Europe? Proceedings from the RECON Midterm Conference. ARENA Report No 3/10;RECON Report No 11.
Eriksen, Erik O. and John Erik Fossum.2007. Europe in Transformation. How to Reconstitute Democracy. RECON Online Working Paper 2007/01. www.reconproject.eu/projectweb/portalproject/RECONWorkingPapers.html
Eriksen, Erik O. and John Erik Fossum.2008. Reconstituting European Democracy.ARENA working paper No.01/08.
Esping-Andersen, GφSta.1990:The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge:Polity Press.
EU Research on Social Sciences and Humanities. Organised civil society and European governance, CIVGOV Final report.2007.
European Institute for Public Participation(EIPP). Public participation in Europe, An international perspective. June2009.
Finke, Barbara.2007. Civil Society Participation in EU Governance. Living Reviews in European Governance. http://www. Livingreviews.org/lreg-2007-2(10-04-2008)
Fishkin, James and Robert Luskin.2000. The Quest of Deliberative Democracy. In Michael Saward (ed.). Democratic Innovation. London: Routledge,1-20.
Flora,P(eds).1986. Growth to Limits:the western welfare states since world war II. Berlin: De Grueter.
Follesdal, A and Hix, S. (2005)'Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU'European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-02
Follesdal, Andreas and Simon Hix.2005. Why there is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-02, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-05-02.pdf
Fossum, John Erik, and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2005.The EU's fledgling society:From deafening silence to critical voice in European constitution making. Journal of Civil Society, Vol.2,Issue 1.
Fossum, John Erik, and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2006. When the people come in: Constitution-making and the belated politicization of the European Union. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-06-03,
Fossum, John Erik, and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2006. When the people come in: Constitution-making and the belated politicization of the European Union. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-06-03,http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-06-03.pdf.
Freise, Matthias (ed.):.2008. European Civil Society on the Road to Success? Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Friedrich, Dawid.2007. Old Wine in New Bottles? The Actual and Potential Contribution of Civil Society Organizations to Democratic Governance in Europe. RECON Online working paper 2007/08.
Goodsell, Charles T..1988:The Social Meaning of Civic Space: Studying Political Authority through Architecture. Lawrence:University Press of Kansas.
Gormley, W.1986:Regulatory issue networks in a federal system. Polity,18 (4), 595-620.
Grant, Ruth W. and Robert O. Keohane:2005. Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics. American Political Science Review (2005),99:1:29-43.
Greenwood, Justin.2002.Inside the EU Business Associations.Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Greenwood, Justin.2003.nterest Representation in the EU.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Greenwood, Justin.2007. Review Article:Organized Civil Society and Democratic Legitimacy in the European Union. British Journal of Political Sciences 37,333-357.
Greenwood, Justin.2007:Interest Representation in the European Union. Basingstoke [u.a.]:Palgrave Macmillan.
Habermas,Juergen.1996.Between Facts and Norms, Cambridge: Polity Press. Hans-Jorg Trenz.2006. Europaeische Offentliehkeit and die verspaetete Politisierung der EU.Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, Issue 1,117-133.
Heinelt,Hubert.2005.Zivilgesellschaftliche Partizipation im EU-Mehrebenensystem— ein Vergleich der Umwelt- und Verbraucherpolitik, in: Knodt/Finke (HG):Europaische Zivilgesellschaft. Konzepte, Akteure, Strategien. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag Sozialwissenschaften.273-289
Heinelt,Hubert.2007:Participatory Governance and European Democracy. In Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Heinrich, Finn and Mahi Khallaf.2005:Assessing civil society in Cyprus and across the world-the CIVICUS civil society index. In: Management in the Non-Profit sector: the role of civil society organizations in participatory democracy and reconciliation. Nicosia: Management Centre of Mediterranean.
Helander,Voitto.1999:Finland, in: Salamon, Lester M., Anheier, Helmut K., et al. 1999: Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the non-profit Sector. Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins Centre for Civil Society Studies.
Helfferich, B. and F. Kolb.2001.Multilevel Action Coordination in European Contentious Politics: The Case of the European Women's Lobby, in: Imig, D. and S. Tarrow (eds). Contentious Europeans, Rowman & Littlefield, Oxford.143-159.
Holloway, Richard.1998:Establishing and Running an Advocacy NGO (Handbook). Lusak: Pact Inc..
Holzhacker,Ronald.2007.Democratic Legitimacy and the European Union. In: Journal of European Integration. Vol.29(3),257-269.
Hooghe, Liesbet and Gary Marks.2001. Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.5 (2001) N° 11; http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2001-011 a.htm http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-06-03.pdf.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Beate Kohler-Koch 1995.The Transformation of Governance in the European Union. MZES Arbeitspapiere Arbeitsbereich III/Nr 11. Mannheim 1995.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Beate Kohler-Koch.1996. Governance in der Europaischen Union. Fragestellungen fur eine interdisziplinare Forschung, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 1996:37, Issue 3, p.537-556.
Jachtenfnchs, Markus, and Beate Kohler-Koch.1996:Regieren im dynamischen Mehrebenensystem. In Markus Jachtenfuchs and Beate Kohler-Koch(eds.):Europaische Integration. Opladen: Leske and Budrich, P.15-46.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Beate Kohler-Koch.2003. Governance and Institutional Development.
Jachtenfuchs, Markus.1997. Democracy and Governance in the European Union, in P. Jachtenfuchs, Markus; Thomas Diez and Sabine Jung.1998. Which Europe?:Conflicting Models of a Legitimate European Political Order. European Journal of International Relations, No.4.
Jordan, Lisa.2005:Mechanism for NGO Accountability. GPPi research paper series No.3.
Habermas, Jurgen.Faktizitat und Geltung:Beitrage zur Diskustheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtstaats, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag,1992.
Kaelble, H.2004. Gibt es seine europaeische Zivilgesellschaft? In Gosewinkel D. er tal. Zivilgesellschaft-national und transnational. Berlin:edition Sigma:267-284. Kaelble, Hartmut.2001.Wege zur Demokratie, Von der Franzosischen Revolution zur Europaischen Union.Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt (DVA), Stuttgart-Miinchen.
Kautto, Mikko.2003. Welfare in Finland in the 1990s. in Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. Issue 31:1-4.
Kenis, Patrick and Franz Traxler.2007:Belgium. In Traxler, Franz and Gerhard Huemer (eds.).2007:Handbook of business interest associations, firm size and governance: A Comparative Analytical Approach. Routledge. P.64-84.
Kingdon, J.W.1995. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, New York: Harper Collins.
Knodt, Michele and Barbara Finke.2003: Europaisierung der Zivilgesellschaften oder Europaische Zivilgesellschaft? Ein Tagungsbericht. Zeitschrift fur Internationale Beziehungen,Heft 2, S.413-420.
Kocka, Juergen.2002. Civil Society and the role of politics. In: Scher, Gerhard(eds).Progressive Governance for the XXI Century. Contribution to the Berlin Conference. Munich.27-35.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Rainer Eising. The Transformation of Governance in the European Union. London :Routledge,1999.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger.2006. The'Governance turn'in EU studies. In: JCMS:Journal of Common Market Studies,44:27-49.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Barbara Finke.2007. The Institutional Shaping of EU-society Relations:A Contribution to Democracy via Participation? Journal of Civil Society, Vol.3, No.3.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Rainer Eising (eds.).1999. The Transformation of Governance in the European Union, London: Routledge.
Kohler-Koch,Beate and Christine Quittkat, Vanessa Buth.2008. Civil Society Organizations under the Impact of the European Commission's Consultation Regime. Paper presented at the CONNEX Final Conference'Efficient and Democratic Governance in a Multi-Level Europe'workshop 5. Mannheim, March 6-8.
Kohler-Koch,Beate and Christine Quittkat.1999. Intermediation of Interests in the European Union. Arbeitspapiere-Mannheimer Zentrum fur Europaische Sozialforschung/ No 9. Mannheim.
Kohler-Koch, Beate et al.2006. Enhancing Multi-Level Democracy by Organizing Civil Society Input. Paper presented at the 20th IPSA World Congress, Fukuoka, July 9-13, 2006.
Kohler-Koch, Beate and Vanessa Buth.2009.Civil Society in EU Governance? Lobby Groups like any other? TranState Working Paper,108. SFB 597. Staatlichkeit im Wandel.2009.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.1992:Interessen und Integration. Die Rolle organisierter Interessen im westeuropaischen Integrationsprozeβ. MZES-Arbeitspapiere Arbeitsbereich III/Nr 1. Mannheim.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.1997.Organized Interests in the EC and the European Parliament European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.1 (1997) N° 9; http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1997-009a.htm
Kohler-Koch,Beate.1999. Europe in Search of Legitimate Governance. ARENA Working Papers WP 99/27.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2000. Framing: the bottleneck of constructing legitimate institutions. Journal of European Public Policy 7:4.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2002. Interdependent Governance: Accountability and System Transition. Paper presented at the First Pan-European Conference on European Union Politics. Bordeaux.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2003. Interdependent European Governance, in: Beate Kohler-Koch (ed.):Linking EU and National Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2005a The Organisation of Interests and Democracy in the European union, paper prepared for the workshop'The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations', CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim,14-15 October 2005.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2005b. European governance and system integration. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-01, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov /pdf/egp-connex-C-05-01.pdf.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2005c.Network Governance within and beyond an enlarged European Union. In: Verdun, Amy and Osvaldo Croci(eds).2005. The European Union in the Wake of Eastern Enlargement, institutional and policy-making challenges. Manchester and New York:.Manchester university press.35-53.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2007a. Political Representation and Civil Society in the EU. Paper prepared for CONNEX Thematic Conference on Political representation. European University Institute Florence, May 25-26,2007.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2007b. The Organization of Interests and democracy in the European Union. In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Berthold Rittberger (eds.).2007:Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2008a. Does Participatory Governance Hold its Promises? Paper presented at the CONNEX Final Conference'Efficient and Democratic Governance in a Multi-Level Europe'. Mannheim, March 6-8.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2008b. Representation, Representativeness, and Accountability in EU-Civil Society Relations. Paper presented at the CONNEX Final Conference 'Efficient and Democratic Governance in a Multi-Level Europe'workshop 5. Mannheim, March 6-8.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2008c. Civil Society and Representation: is there a Hole in the Whole? Paper presented at the CONNEX workshop on Representation. EUI Florence, April 23-24 2008. http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-connex-C-05-01.pdf.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2008d. Civil Society in EU governance-a remedy to the democratic accountability deficit? Concepts & Methods,2008:4, issue 1, p.3-6.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2008e: A Critical Appraisal of EU Governance. In Zhou Hong and Beate Kohler-Koch(eds.).2008:EU Governance Model. Beijing: Social Science Academic Press (China).P.73-87.
Kohler-Koch, Beate.2009:The Three Worlds of European Civil Society-What role for civil society for what kind of Europe? Policy and Society. Vol.28, Issue 1. P.47-57.
Kohler-Koch,Beate.2010. Civil society and EU democracy:'astroturf' representation? Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.17,Issue 1,100-116.
Kohler-Koch, Beate; Dirk De Bievre und William Maloney (Hrsg.) 2008. Opening EU-Governance to Civil Society. Mannheim: CONNEX Report Series Nr.5.
Kooiman, Jan.1993. Social-Political Governance:Introduction. In: Kooiman, Jan(eds). Modern Governance. New Government Society Interactions. London: Sage.1-9.
Koslowski, Peter and Andreas Follesdal (eds.).1997.Democracy and the European Union. Berlin: Springer.
Krasner, Stephen. D..1982. Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: regime as intervening variables. International Organization 36,2.
Kutter, Amelie and Vera Trappmann.2010.Civil society in Central and Eastern Europe: The mbivalent legacy of accession. Acta Politica 45,41-69 (14 April 2010).
Kv(?)rk, Geir Ove.2007: Organised Civil Society in the EU Constitution-making Process, in Fossum, John Erik, Philip Schlesinger and Geir Ove Kv(?)rk (eds). Public Sphere and Civil Society? Transformations of the European Union, ARENA Report' 2/2007.
Lane, David.2010. Civil Society in the Old and New Member States: Ideology, institutions and democracy promotion. In: European Societies, Volume 12, Issue 3,293— 315.
Lane, Jan-Erik.2000. The Public Sector: Concepts, Models and Approaches, London: Sage.
Larat, Fabrice and Thomas Schneider.2009. Trends and Patterns in Governance Research: what do the GovData tell us? In: Kohler-Koch, Beate and Fabrice Larat(eds).2009. European Multi-Level Governance, contrasting images in national research. Cheltenham & Northampton: Edward Elgar.167-189.
Lee, Julian.2004. NGO Accountability: rights and responsibilities. Paper presented for the Annual Conference of the Program on NGOs and Civil Society (CASIN).19th October 2004.Geneva:Switzerland.
Lehmann,Wilhelm and Lars Bosche.2003. Lobbying in the European Union:Current Rules and Practices. Working Paper on Constitutional Affairs Series of Directorate-General for Research of European Parliament. Luxembourg.
Leif, Thomas und Rudolf Speth [Hrsg.].2006: Die funfte Gewalt: Lobbyismus in Deutschland. Bonn:
Levitt, T.1973. The Third Sector:New Tactics for a Responsive Society. New York: Amacom.
Liebert, Ulrike and Hans-Jorg Trenz.2009.Civil society and the reconstitution of democracy in Europe: Introducing a new research field. Policy and society. Vol.28, Issue 1.
Lipset, Seymour Martin.1960. Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. Garden City: Doubleday.
Lipset, S. M. and Stein Rokkan.1967. Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments. In: Lipset, S. M. and Stein Rokkan (eds.).1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments.New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, pp.1-64.
Lord, Christopher.1998. Democracy in the European Union. Sheffield Academic Press.
Lord, Christopher.2007. Parliamentary Representation in a Decentered Polity. In Beate Kohler-Koch and Berthold Rittberger (eds). Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union. Lanham: Rowman&Littlefield,129-156.
Losche, Peter.2007:Schadet Lobbyismus der Demokratie?-Verbande konnen den Staat entlasten. Kulturaustausch. No.2/2007.
Lottman, Herbert R.2002:Barcelona: The Translation Market in Spain's Trade Capital. Publishers Weekly,12/9/2002.
Magnette, Paul. 2001. European Governance and Civic Participation: Can the European Union be politicised? Jean Monnet Working Paper No.6/01, Brussels.
Mair, Peter and Jacques Thomassen.2010. Political representation and government in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy,17:1,20-35.
Mair, Peter.2005. Popular Democracy and the European Union Polity. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-05-03, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/ pdf/egp-newgov-C-05-03.pdf.
Majone, Giandomenico.2010.Transaction-cost efficiency and the democratic deficit. Journal of European Public Policy, Volume 17. Issue 2. Pages 150-175.
Majone,Giandomenico.1998.Europe's'Democratic Deficit':The Question of Standards. In: European Law Journal, Vol.4, No.1, pp.5-28.
Maloney, William A. and Jan van Deth.2008:The associational impact on attitudes towards Europe:a tale of two cities. In Maloney, William and Jan van Deth (eds.),2008: Civil Society and Governance in Europe from national to international linkages. Cheltenham, UK [u.a.]:Edward Elgar,2008.
March, James G and Johan P. Olsen.1989. Rediscovering Institutions, New York: Free Press.
March, James G and Johan P. Olsen.1995. Democratic Governance. New York: Free Press.
Marks, Gary, Liesbet Hooghe and Kermit Blank.1996. European integration from the 1980s: state-centric vs. multi-level governance. In: Journal of European Common Market, 34(3).
Maurer, Andreas.2003. Committees in the EU system: a deliberative perspective. In(?) Eriksen,Erik O., Christian Joerges and Jiirgen Neyer (Eds.) European Governance, Deliberation and the Quest for Democratisation. ARENA REPORT 2/03. Oslo/Florence.
Mavrikos-Adamou, Tina.2010. Challenges to democracy building and the role of civil society. In: Democratization, Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 514-533.
Mayntz, Renate [Hrsg.].1992: Verbdnde zwischen Mitgliederinteressen und Gemeinwohl. Gutersloh:Verl. Bertelsmann-Stiftung.
Mayntz, Renate.1993a. Governing Failures and the Problem of Governability: some comments on a theoretical paradigm. In: Kooiman, Jan(eds). Modern Governance. New Government Society Interactions. London:Sage.1-9.
Maytz,Renate.1993b. Policy-Netzwerke und die Logik von Verhandlungssystemen. In: Heritier,Adrienne (eds). Policy Analyse. Kritik und Neuorientierung (PVS-Sonderheft 24).
McLean, Iain and Alistair McLean.2009: The concise Oxford dictionary of politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mittag, Juergen.2004. Civil Society and European Integration: New Democratic Forces in the European Union? Paper for the conference "Interest groups in the 21st century in France and Europe.
Moeller, Kolja.2010. European Governmentality or decentralizd network governance? The case of European employment strategy. RECON Online Working Paper 2010/08, www.reconproject.eu/projectweb/portalproject/RECONWorkingPapers.html
Moravcsik, A. (2002)'In defence of the democratic deficit: reassessing legitimacy in the European Union'Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol.40, Issue 4.
Naidoo, Kumi (CIVCUS).2003:Civil Society Accountability:"Who Guards the Guardians? Speech on 3 April 2003.New York: UN.
Naβmacher, Hiltrud.2002:Politikwissenschaft (4. Auflage). Munchen, Wien: Oldenbourg.
Neshkova, Milena.2008:Local and Regional Interest and Democratic Representation in the EU. Paper presented at annual meeting of MPSA Annual National Conference, Hilton, Chicago,03 April 2008.
Neuhold, Christine.2005. The European Parliament: a venue for "civil society interests"? Contribution for Workshop "The Institutional Shaping of EU-Society Relations", CONNEX Research Group 4, Mannheim,14-15 October 2005.
Newton, Kenneth.2001:Trust, Social Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy. International Political Science Review. Vol.22, Issue 2,201-214.
O'Connor, Bernard.1997. some basic ideas on decision making and lobbying in the European Union. Liuc papers no.47. Serie Impresa e Istituzioni. 3.Noevembre 1997.
Olsen, Johan P..1996. Institutional Design in Democratic Contexts. ARENA working paper 96/no.27.
Parkinson, John.2003. Legitimacy Problems in Deliberative Democracy. Political Studies. Vol.51,180-196.
Pasha,Mustapha Kamal and David Blaney.1998. Elusive Paradise:the promise and peril of global civil society. Altematives,Vol.23, No.4.
Peeters, Marguerite A.2003. The principle of participatory democracy in the new Europe:a critical analysis. Paper for the Conference on "Nongovernmental organizations: the growing power of an unelected few". American Enterprise Institute. June 11,2003.
Persson, Thomas.2007:Democratizing European Chemicals Policy: Do Consultations Favor Civil Society Participation? Journal of civil society, Vol.3, No.3. pp. 223-238.
Peters, B. Guy.1996. Is it the Institutions? Explaining the Failure of Health Care Reform in the United States. Public Policy and Administration,11,1, pp.8-25.
Pitkin, Hanna F.1967:The Concept of Representation. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Pleines, Heiko.2010.Is this the way to Brussels? CEE civil society involvement in EU governance.Acta Politica 45,229-246 (14 April 2010).
Pollack, Johannes et al.2009. On Political Representation, myths and challenges. RECON Online Working Paper, 2009/03, http://www.reconproject.eu/projectweb/ portalproject/RECONWorkingPapers.html
Pollak, Johannes et al.2009. On Political Representation, myths and challenges. RECON online working papers No.3
Powell, G. Bingham. Jr. 1976:Political Cleavage Structure, Cross-Pressure, Processes, and Partisanship: An Empirical Test of the Theory. American Journal of Political Science, Vol.20, No.1. pp.1-23.
Price, R.G 2004:redefining the political spectrum: the rational spectrum. http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/redefining_the_political_spectru.htm. Retrieved on 11 March 2009
Putnam, Robert D:1995.Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy 6:1, January 1995,65-78. p.3
Quittkat, Christine and Barbara Finke. 2008:The EU Commission Consultation Regime", in: Kohler-Koch, Beate, Dirk De Bievre and William Maloney (Eds.). 2008: Opening EU-Governance to Civil Society. Mannheim: 2008. [CONNEX Report Series / No.5].183-222.
Rein, M. and Schon, D..1991.Frame-Reflective Policy Discourse, in P. Wagner, C. Hirschon Weiss, B. Wittrock and H. Wollman (Eds), Social Sciences and Modern States, National Experiences and Theoretical Crossroads, Cambridge:University Press.
Rektor, Laurie.2002. Advocacy-The Sound of Citizen's Voices, A position paper from the Advocacy Working Group. http://www.ginsler.com/documents/sound_of_citizens_voices.pdf. Retrieved on 17.Febrary 2009.
Ringquist, Evan J., Jeff Worsham, and Marc Allen Eisner.2003:Salience, Complexity, and the Legislative Direction of Regulatory Bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13 (2):141-164.
Rittberger, Berthold.2009:The historical origins of the EU's system of representation. In:Journal of European Public Policy. Vol.16(1),43-61.
Roehrig, Johannes.2008. Bruessel en bloc, Lobbyisten bleiben undercover. In: Der Stern.04. Juli 2008.
Rosamond,Ben.2000. Theories of European Integration. Palgrave Macmillan. Follesdal A., and Simon Hix.2006:Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: A response to Majone and Moravcsik.in JCMS-JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES Vo1.44 Issue 3:533-562
Rosenau, James N. and Ernst-Otto Czempiel.1992.Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. Cambridge University Press.
Rudzio, Wolfgang.1982:Die organisierte Demokratie:Parteien und Verbande in der Bundesrepublik. Stuttgart:Metzler.
Ruzza, Carlo and Emanuela Bozzini.2008. Organised Civil Society and European Governance: Routes of Contestation. In: European Political Science. Jg.7, Heft 3, S. 296-303.
Ruzza, Carlo and Vincent Della Sala (eds.).2007:Governance and Civil Society in the European Union. Vol.1:Normative Perspectives. Manchester:Manchester Univ. Press.
Ruzza, Carlo.2005. EU Public Policies and the Participation of Organized Civil Society. Working Papers del Dipartimento di studi sociali e politici, Universita degli studi di Milano.2005-11-25. www.sociol.unimi.it
Sanchez-Salgado, Rosa.2007. Giving a European dimension to civil society organizations. Journal of Civil Society, Vol.3, No.3.
Saurugger, Sabine.2007. 《 Organized civil society 》 as a legitimate partner in the European Union. http://www.ceri-sciences-po.org.
Scharpf, Fritz.1999. Governing in Europe - Effective and Democratic? Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Scharpf, Fritz.1984. Economic and Institutional Constraints of Full-employment Strategies. Sweden, Austria, and Western Germany,1973-1982. In:Goldthorpe, John H. (Hrsg.).1984: Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism. Oxford:Clarendon Press, 257-290.
Schmid, Josef.2008:Wohlfahrtsstaat. In: Nohlen, Dieter and Florian Grotz (ed.). 2008:Kleines Lexikon. Bonn:Bundeszentrale fur politische Bildung. (2001. Munchen: Verlag CH Beck) P.643.
Schmidt, Vivien.2008. Discursive Institutionalism: the explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science.2008:11.
Schmitter, Philippe and Gerhard Lehmbruch. (ed.) 1979:Trends towards corporatist intermediation, Beverly Hills:Sage Publications.
Schmitter, Philippe C.1979:Modes of interest intermediation and models of societal change in Western Europe. in Schmitter, Philippe C. and Gerhard Lehmbruch (eds.). 1979: Trends toward corporatist intermediation. London and Beverly Hills:Sage Publications. pp63-94.
Scigliano,Robert.1995. Representation. In Lipset, Seymour Martin(eds.) Encyclopaedia of Democracy. London:Routledge.1054-1058.
Scott, W. Richard.2001. Institutions and Organizations(2nd edition). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Sissenich, Beate.2010.Weak states, weak societies:Europe's east-west gap. Acta Politica 45,11-40 (14 April 2010).
Smismans, Stijn (Hg.).2006.Civil Society and Legitimate European Governance.
Smismans, Stijn.2006. New Modes of Governance and the Participatory Myth. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. N-06-01, http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/pdf/egp-newgov-N-06-01.pdf.
Smismans, Stijn.2000. The European Economic and Social Committee:towards deliberative democracy via a functional assembly. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.4 (2000) No.12.http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2000-012a.htm.
Smismans, Stijn.2002. "Civil Society" in European Institutions Discourses, Paper presented to the ECPR joint sessions, p.19-20.
Smismans, Stijn.2003. European Civil Society:Shaped by Discourse and Institutional Interests. European Law Journal,Vo1.9, No.4.
Smismans, Stijn.2004. Law, legitimacy, and European governance:functional participation in social regulation. Oxford [u.a.]:Oxford Univ. Press.
Sotiropoulos, Dimitri A. and Evika Karamagioli.2006:Greek Civil Society:The Long Road to Maturity.-2005. CIVCUS report.
Steffek, Jens and Patrizia Nanz.2007:Emergent Patterns of Civil Society Participation in Global and European Governance. In:Steffek, Jens et al. (eds.):Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance, A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? London:Palgrave:1-29.
Steffek,J. et al.2009. Assessing the democratic legitimacy of transnational CSOs:five criteria. TranState Working Paper, Bremen:SFB 597. Staatlichkeit im Wandel.2009.
Steffek,Jens and Stijn Smismans.2007. Civil Society participation in European Governance. NEWGOV Policy Brief No.11.
Sudbery, Imogen.2010. The European Union as political resource:NGOs as change agents? Acta Politica 45,136-157 (14 April 2010).
Takahashi, Mutsuko.2003:Transition in Welfare Model:The Case Study of Finland and Its Theoretical Implications on Welfare Model. Shimane journal of policy studies. -.6. pp.31-48.
Tocqueville, Alexis de.1835. De la democratie en Amerique, collection 10/18(Paris:1963).
Tommel, Ingeborg.2010. Civil society in the EU: a strong player or a fig-leaf for the democratic deficit? (Policy Brief).Canada-Europe Transatlantic Dialogue:Seeking Transnational Solutions to 21st Century Problems. March 2010. http://www.carleton.ca/europecluster.
Trenz, Hans-Jorg.2007. The imaginary of a European Civil Society. Paper presented at RECON WPS Kick-Off International Conference:"Reconstituting Democracy from below: New Approaches to Civil Society and the Public Sphere", Delmenhorst, May 17-19.
Trenz, Hans-Jorg.2009.European civil society: Between participation, representation and discourse. In: Policy & Society. Vol.28(1),35-46.
Vieler,Alexander.1986:Interessen, Gruppen und Demokratie, Eine sozialokonomische Untersuchung uber den Einfluss von Interessenverbanden auf wirtschaftspolitische Entscheidungen. Mohr Siebeck, Tubingen.
Vogel, Joachim et al.2003: Statistics Sweden-Associational Life in Sweden. (Living Conditions report-.101).
Warleigh, Alex.2001. "'Europeanizing" civil society: NGOs as agents of political socialization'. In: Journal of Common Market Studies 39(4):619-39.
Warleigh, Alex.2000.'The hustle:citizenship practice, NGOs and "policy coalitions" in the European Union-the cases of auto oil, drinking water and unit pricing'. In Journal of European Public Policy 7(2):229-43.
Warleigh,Alex.2003a. Democracy in the European Union: Theory, Practice and Reform.London:SAGE.
Warren, Mark E..2009. Citizen Participation and Democratic Deficits: Considerations from the Perspective of Democratic Theory. In: DeBardeleben, Joan and Jon Pammett(eds).Activating the Citizen: Dilemmas Of Participation In Europe And Canada. Palgave MacMillan.
Weber, Jurgen.1977:Die Interessengruppen im politischen System der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Stuttgart [u.a.]:Kohlhammer.
Weber, Max.1913. Economy and Society. California:University of California Press.
Webster,Ruth.2000. What drives interest group collaboration at the EU level? Evidence from the European environmental interest groups. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) Vol.4 (2000) N°17; http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2000-017a.htm.
Weiler, J.1995. Fundamental Rights and fundamental boundaries:on standards and values in the protection of human rights. Neuwhal, N. and A. Rosas.The European Union and Human Rights. The Hague, Kluwer:51-76.
Wessels, Bernhard.1997:Interest Groups and Political Representation in Europe. Paper presented at the joint sessions of workshops of the ECPR, Bern,27 February-4 March 1997.
White, Gordon et al.1999. Civil Society and Governance, a concept paper of project Civil Society and Governance funded by the Ford Foundation, http://www.ccss.pku.edu.cn/ccss/Html/xslw_zhl/223544324.htm1.2006-2-28.
Wiener, Antje.2007. Analysing Democratic Legitimacy Collaboratively. European Integration, Vol.29, No.3,381-385.
Williamson, Peter F..2004:Corporatism and Neocorporatist Theory. in Clive S. Thomas(ed.). Research Guide to U.S. and International Interest Groups. Westport, Connecticut:Praeger Publishers. P.48-53.
World Bank. 1995:"Working with NGOs: A Practical Guide to Operational Collaboration between the World Bank and Non-Governmental Organizations," Operations Policy Department, World Bank, p.29.
Young, L. And J. Everitt.2004. Advocacy groups. Vancouver, BC:UBC Press. P.5.
Zimmer, Annette and Birgit Sittermann.2004. Brussels Civil Society. Working Papers of ISTR Sixth International Conference "Contesting Citizenship and Civil Society in a Divided World". Ryerson University and York University, Toronto, Canada, July 11-14, 2004.
Zimmer, Annette and Birgit Sittermann.2005. Brussels Civil Society. ISTR Conference working papers series:http://www.jhu.edu/-istr/pubs.
Zimmer, Annette and Matthias Freise.2008. Bringing Society Back in: Civil Society, Social Capital, and Third Sector. In: Maloney, William A. and Jan W. van Deth. (eds).2008. Civil Society and Governance in Europe. From national to international linkages. Cheltenham & Northampton: Edward Elgar.19-44.
Zimmer, Annette.2007. Governance and Civil Society. http://www.nez.uni-muenster.de/download/Zimmer_Civ_Gov.pdf (Nachwuchsgruppe "Europaische Zivilgesellschaft und Multilevel Governance"-NEZ-Working Paper).
Zittlel, Thomas.2008. Participatory Engineering: Theoretical Assessment and Empirical Findings. in Kohler-Koch, Beate; Dirk De Bievre und William Maloney (Hrsg.) 2008. Opening EU-Governance to Civil Society. Mannheim:[CONNEX Report Series/Nr. 5. P.119-144.
European Commission (1997):Promoting the role of voluntary organizations and foundations in Europe. COM(1997)0241 final.
European Commission(2000). Consultation and participation of civil society. (Group 2a).Report of working group.
European Commission. Communication from the Commission of 2nd December 1992 "An open and structured dialogue between the Commission and special interest groups". OJ C 63,5/3/1993.
European Commission (2000):Discussion Paper "THe Commission and Non Governmental Organizations: Building a Stronger Partnership". COM(2000) 11 final.
European Commission (2001). European Governance—A White Paper. COM (2001)428fmal.
European Commission (2002a).Communication from the Commission "Towards a reinforced culture of consultation and dialogue-General principles and minimum standards for consultation of interested parties by the Commission ". COM(2002) 704 final.
European Commission (2002b).Communication from the Commission. European Governance: better regulation. COM(2002) 275fmal.
European Commission (2004). REPORT ON EUROPEAN GOVERNANCE (2003-2004). SEC(2004) 1153.
European Commission(2006). Green paper "European Transparency Initiative". COM(2006) 194 final.
European Commission(2006). White paper ON A EUROPEAN COMMUNICATION POLICY".COM(2006) 35 final
European Economic and Social Committee (1999). OPINION on The role and contribution of civil society organizations in the building of Europe. CES 851/1999.
European Economic and Social Committee (2000).OPINION on the Commission discussion paper. CES 811/2000.
European Economic and Social Committee(2001). OPINION on "Organized civil society and European governance: the Committee's contribution to the drafting of the White Paper". CES 535/2001
European Economic and Social Committee(2003). FINAL REPORT of the ad hoc group on "Structured cooperation with European civil society organizations and networks". CESE 1498/2003 fin.
EP.2008.EU lobbying under spotlight. In: Focus.20080414FCS26459.
European Commission.2007. Communication from the Commission. Follow-up to the Green Paper'European Transparency Initiative'. COM(2007) 127 final, on 21 March 2007.
Commission Staff Working Document.2007. Results of the Commission Consultation on the Green Paper'European Transparency Initiative'. SEC(2007) 360. on 21 March 2007.
European Commission,2007. Green paper Public access to document held by institutions of the European community, a review. COM(2007) 185 final.
European Commission,2008:Europe in figures-Eurostat statistical yearbook 2008.