Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Två demokratier – två system: Grundlagsändring i Sverige och Danmark

Lundstedt, Carl LU and Karaca, Roze LU (2026) STVA23 20252
Department of Political Science
Abstract (Swedish)
One of the most invasive choices a democratic society can make is to amend its constitution. Despite the fact that Sweden and Denmark are frequently described as having very similar democracies, the two nations have made different decisions about how these changes should be carried out. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast Sweden's and Denmark's constitutional amendment procedures and how these variations impact the potential for political change. It is examined which actors are granted influence in the decision-making process and how high the thresholds for change are by comparing the constitutional frameworks of the two nations. The study's foundation is a qualitative text analysis of pertinent official documents and... (More)
One of the most invasive choices a democratic society can make is to amend its constitution. Despite the fact that Sweden and Denmark are frequently described as having very similar democracies, the two nations have made different decisions about how these changes should be carried out. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast Sweden's and Denmark's constitutional amendment procedures and how these variations impact the potential for political change. It is examined which actors are granted influence in the decision-making process and how high the thresholds for change are by comparing the constitutional frameworks of the two nations. The study's foundation is a qualitative text analysis of pertinent official documents and legal texts, which is bolstered by institutional theory and a power perspective. The outcome demonstrates that, in actuality, the Swedish model, despite its relatively slow procedure, offers greater flexibility for constitutional change than the Danish model, where strict public participation frequently makes it challenging to enact constitutional amendments. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Lundstedt, Carl LU and Karaca, Roze LU
supervisor
organization
course
STVA23 20252
year
type
L2 - 2nd term paper (old degree order)
subject
keywords
Constitutional Amendment, Sweden, Denmark, Comparative Analysis, Institutions
language
Swedish
id
9217783
date added to LUP
2026-01-26 16:48:45
date last changed
2026-01-26 16:48:45
@misc{9217783,
  abstract     = {{One of the most invasive choices a democratic society can make is to amend its constitution. Despite the fact that Sweden and Denmark are frequently described as having very similar democracies, the two nations have made different decisions about how these changes should be carried out. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast Sweden's and Denmark's constitutional amendment procedures and how these variations impact the potential for political change. It is examined which actors are granted influence in the decision-making process and how high the thresholds for change are by comparing the constitutional frameworks of the two nations. The study's foundation is a qualitative text analysis of pertinent official documents and legal texts, which is bolstered by institutional theory and a power perspective. The outcome demonstrates that, in actuality, the Swedish model, despite its relatively slow procedure, offers greater flexibility for constitutional change than the Danish model, where strict public participation frequently makes it challenging to enact constitutional amendments.}},
  author       = {{Lundstedt, Carl and Karaca, Roze}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Två demokratier – två system: Grundlagsändring i Sverige och Danmark}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}