Dr. Jeff Sheldon discusses various topics from a London School of Economics public policy analysis course: Denmark’s constitutional system.

Introduction

Between 31 January and 16 April 2024 I took a ten week, 80+ hour graded course from the London School of Economics and Political science (LSE) in public policy analysis. In this series, presented in the order of the ten LSE course modules, I offer up selections of my writings from across the course that include topics in economics, institutions, policy, statistics, policy evaluation, and politics, etc. Most are an answer to a prompt or question (provided if applicable), and vary between 250 and 800 words in length, short but hopefully insightful. As always, you might not agree or agree only in part with my answers or assessments so feel free to engage me in dialogue, it will be most welcome. Likewise, if you’d like context, please don’t hesitate to ask. Enjoy!

Constitutional system of Denmark

In this unit we learnt how differences in electoral systems impact public policy and how the differences between parliamentary and presidential systems impact public policy as well. For this discussion we were encouraged to conduct research into the constitutional system of a country in which we weren’t familiar. I chose Denmark in part because a modest amount of my genetic heritage resides therein and in part because the constitutional system is a hybrid unlike that of the United States, my current abode. Three questions were posed, my responses to each are offered below. If this sounds like an assignment you’d have gotten in the lower levels of your educational journey I don’t think you’d be too far off the mark. It was interesting to me regardless; hopefully it will be interesting to you if Denmark is a country which has been off your radar from a political perspective, this piece offers a quick primer.

Question 1: Does the country you have selected have a presidential, parliamentary, or hybrid system?

Answer 1: According to multiple sources, the system of governance in Denmark is somewhat of a hybrid in that it is both a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy; notably, an act of parliament only takes effect after receiving assent from the monarchy. Parliament, called the?Folketing, is the only body with legislative powers and is structured as a multi-party system. The multi-party system guarantees no single party has a chance of gaining power alone so parties must work with each other to form coalition governments also called minority cabinets. Further, Danish parliament has three independent governing power apparatuses as a form of checks and balances: the legislative, executive and judicial. The legislative and the executive powers are balanced against each other as a majority of the Folketing’s 179 Members can overthrow a cabinet member or a minister through an order paper (i.e., a no confidence vote). In addition, the prime minister can, at any time, dissolve the Folketing and call a general election to create a more stable majority. Out of the 179 members of parliament, including the Faroe Islands and Greenland (both are Danish protectorates which elect two members each), 135 are elected from ten multi-member constituencies via a party list system using the d'Hondt method (i.e., allocating more seats to larger parties) with the remaining 40 seats allocated to ensure proportionality at a national level. To get a share of supplementary seats a party needs to get at least two percent of the total number of votes; a remuneration system allows anyone to run for election irrespective of income.

Question 2: What electoral system is in place? How do you think this system impacts the creation of public policy?

Answer 2: Notably, Denmark’s democratic electoral system is based on consensus and proportional representation which guarantees representation of all parts of the country, safeguarded, in part, by what’s known as the Parliamentary Election Act of Denmark. Parliamentary elections are called by the monarch on advice of the prime minister, three to four years after the last election, although early elections may occur if the prime minister, at their discretion has dissolved the Folketing and usually at a time advantageous to their party. In Danish democracy, administration of the state is contingent on a voluntary agreement between the monarchy and citizens. Citizens have no direct influence on state administration, but exert influence indirectly by voting. However, referendums on issues of national concern can be called by parliament as a way of consulting with citizens to gain direct popular influence. Last, a majority of citizens may vote to remove politicians they find unsuited to be in power.

Question 3: Does the country have a majoritarian or consensus system? If it is a presidential system, is it unified or divided? And what are the advantages and disadvantages of this system for public policy?

Answer 3: As noted, Denmark has a consensus system as no single party, of which there are many, has enough votes to rule on its own so several parties might negotiate on goals to form a multi-party coalition. Currently, there are representatives of 16 parties in the Danish parliament, and since 1909 no party has had enough representatives to rule entirely on its own. The leading figure of?one of the stronger parties within that coalition becomes the prime minister, while leaders from the other coalition parties take on important ministerial roles.?The advantage of Denmark’s multi-party consensus system is that multiple perspectives are brought into the decision-making process so that citizens might feel, through their party’s representatives they have some involvement and influence on the affairs of state through public policy promulgation. The clear disadvantage is that trying to build a coalition through a negotiated process takes time and effort thereby extending the amount of time necessary to get to the point where policy can be crafted. It’s an advantage to have many voices heard, but it can be highly inefficient.??? ?

Thanks for reading. Please feel free to ask questions or offer comments below. Next up: the impact of decentralisation and electoral incentives.