Torbjörn Bergman, Umeå university

2007-2012

The central idea of this research project was to depart from the customary tradition of conducting research on constitutional reforms many years after the reform was debated, approved and implemented. There are many examples of excellent scholarship that has been conducted in this fashion, but the approach relies heavily on the use of archives and the memories of still-available participants in an effort to reconstruct the bargaining process and the logic of the agreement. By contrast, this project studies the making of constitutional reform as it takes place - i.e. in progress. By following what happens in real time, studying important events closely, and by paying close attention to what is taking place inside parties, this research has enriched our understanding of constitutional change as well as on how political parties make difficult choices.
The project has proceeded according to the plan outlined in the research application. Its most important contributions correspond to the projects three main publications.

Constitutional reform 2010
At the Annual Meeting of the Swedish Association for Political Scientists (SWEPSA) in Umeå in October 2011, all participants were presented with a special issue of Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift (2011, 113:3). Entitled Författningsreformen 2010 - de politiska partierna och politikens spelregler, the issue is devoted to an analysis of the revision of the Swedish constitution (regeringsformen) that was decided upon after the 2010 election. The special issue was also the basis for the SWEPA Conference's thematic debate.
The issue includes an introduction from the principal investigator (Bergman) and five analytical articles. In the first, Magnus Blomgren analyzes the most important proposals from the (Swedish) theoretical tradition that studies the multiple and sometimes confliction goals that political parties may have. In the second, David Feltenius shows that the political parties have competitors as regards the work of designing political institutions. The influence exercised by the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (Sveriges kommuner och landsting) in constitutional questions has grown over time. In fact, the association's agenda is clearly reflected in the final revision of the constitution. The third article asks questions about the absence of a clear gender agenda in the proposals. It is true that the language was made gender neutral. But as Jessika Wide shows, given the relatively strong position of the gender agenda in recent decades, more radical proposals were almost curiously missing from the proposals and in the public debate about them. The fourth article, by Shirin Ahlbäck Öberg, discusses something that the commission working on the proposals largely left untouched, namely the role and position of the National Audit Office. While it was moved from the jurisdiction of the government to Riksdag jurisdiction, the Audit Office has been struggling to find its proper form and function. While this is understandable in light of Sweden's parliamentary tradition, it also means that the Audit Office was treated as something less than a fundamentally constitutional issue.
The last of the articles in the special issue addresses the relationship between Sweden, as a member state, and the European Union. Sverker Gustavsson notes that during Sweden's membership negotiations, Swedish politicians resisted the idea that the supremacy of European Union laws over Swedish ones should be publicly codified. He argues, however, that this supremacy is recognized in the living constitution. In addition, it is interpreted too strictly in the sense that the courts and the state administration do not review the constitutionality of directives and other decisions that stem from the EU. Rather, they do so only with rules and regulations stemming from the Riksdag. Among the many unresolved constitutional issues regarding the relationship between the EU and Sweden, this is one of the important ones. As a consequence of it, the Swedish "living constitution" (or constitutional practice) has changed quite dramatically in the last 20 years.
Two other project publications deal with long-term change and the relationship between rules, norms and behavior in constitutional matters.

Swedish democracy in a West European context
In the second project publication, The Madisonian Turn (Michigan University Press 2011), we discuss, describe and analyze a major shift in the predominant view about what representative democracy ought to look like. We name this shift after James Madison, the third president of the United States and one of the authors of The Federalist Papers (1982 [1787-1788]). This (re-)emerging way of thinking emphasizes skepticism towards elected politicians. Elected representatives are acknowledged as a necessity for democracy. However, their ambitions for power need to be pitted against the ambitions of others, and none of the groups should have too much power. The preferred constitutional order is a separation of power. For this reason a federal solution is also better than a unitary state. In a federal order, none the levels of power should be allowed to completely dominate the other(s). This protects the individual from the risk of oppression or even tyranny from one of the levels of power. In this perspective, democracy and freedom are protected best in a system of checks and balances.
In the constitutional revision that we analyzed in the special issue mentioned above, the new trend was noticeable in the discussion of a new and elected role for judges and courts. In this instance, the changes are not dramatic. All parliamentary parties cherish the system of autonomous courts and constitutional review. The Social Democrats and the Left Party think that the current system works well, and in that respect their views have not changed much since the mid-1970s. However, in comparison with the 1970s and the 1980s, the four Alliance parties that make up the government and the Green Party have come, over time, to view the courts as a natural part of the constitutional balance. In addition, they are much more inclined to favor the notion of a separate constitutional court. These parties also stress the importance of party politics, but at the same time they have come to favor preference voting on individual candidates. Compared to the parties on the political left, they have also begun to be more favorable to the an increased use of local referendums.
Other changes in the Swedish (living) constitution over the last three decades have been in the same (Madisonian) direction and have been pursued with encompassing consensus. The Parliament's support for EU membership and strengthening Central Bank independence are examples of this. As a consequence, however, the Riksdag has a new and more limited role in the emerging separation-of-powers system.

Parliamentary roles
In the same (Madisonian) vein, it has perhaps become more common to emphasize the need for constitutional reform of parliamentary procedures and the organization of political parties. This too is related to new expectations about elected officials, changing patterns of conflict cleavages and demands for transparency. Nonetheless, rule-changes, however interesting they might be in themselves, must also be analyzed from the perspective of changing behavior. Our third major publication, and the second one with an international publishing house, does precisely that. This is the book Parliamentary roles in modern legislatures (Routledge 2012).
This book brings together a set of well-known international scholars to scrutinize contemporary aspects of role theory and the impact of rule change on political behavior. The authors consider the impact of legislative, parliamentary and representative roles as they are manifest in the norms and behavior of parliamentarians. The way in which parliamentarians both view their tasks and experience pressure to fulfill these roles is an indication of the conditions that they operate under as elected representatives. These pressures vary in systematic ways across various contexts.

New avenues for research and other comments
This project has built a basis for further Nordic and European comparisons. One example is the current discussion in Iceland, in the wake of the country's financial crisis, about a new mix of direct and representative democracy. Another is the further shift in Finland, away from a semi-presidential system to one of parliamentary democracy. Constitutional issues are also under debate in the other countries. A focused and comparative comparison of the most common proposals for change would be of great interest.
Another spin-off project would be to conduct a "vertical" power study. A few major power studies have been produced in all the Scandinavian countries since 1980. However, these have mainly been horizontal, i.e. focused on power relations at the national level. New local and regional developments and above all the impact of the EU have not been investigated as systematically and widely. This research idea is one that is particularly suitable for a research program consisting of several projects.
Finally, the instructions for writing the project report asks for information about the account labeled "other expenses". In the case of this project, these expenses amount to about 2 percent of the total cost and cover the cost of books, other research material and printing.

Publications

Publikationer (temanummer och böcker samt kapitel och artiklar som publicerats utanför de tre huvudsakliga projektpublikationerna)

Bergman, Torbjörn (2011). Gästredaktör. ”Tema: Författningsreform 2010 – partierna och politikens spelregler”, Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift, 113:3, 259-350.

Bergman, Torbjörn and Strøm, Kaare, eds., (2011). The Madisonian Turn – Political Parties and Parliamentary Democracy in Nordic Europe.  Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Blomgren, Magnus & Rozenberg, Olivier, eds. (2012), Parliamentary Roles in Modern Legislatures, London: Routledge/ECPR studies in European political science.

Feltenius, David (2011), ”Grundlagen och den kommunala självstyrelsen”. Ivarsson, Andreas (red), Nordisk kommunforskning: En forskningsöversikt med 113 projekt. Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet, Förvaltningshögskolan.

Feltenius, David (2011), ”En ren partiangelägenhet? Om regionala och lokala intressen i författningspolitiken”. Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift, 113 (3), ss. 291-312.

Feltenius, David (2010), ”En progressiv agenda? Om Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting och författningspolitiken”. I: Tallberg, Pontus & Bergmann-Winberg, Marie-Louise von, Flernivåstyrning - framgångsfaktor för kommuner, regioner och staten. Kristianstad: Region Skåne.