Democracy can be found in many forms and variants. Most states and most organisations today claim that they are democratic. Democracy is easy to declare，and it is relatively easy to be recognised as a formal democratic state. It is more difficult，however，to develop and consolidate strong democratic institutions，practices，and traditions. In recent years，some scholars，politicians and NGO representatives have argued that a strong civil society is the best indicator of a living and well-functioning democracy. In other words，a strong democracy needs to be embedded in a civil society. Whether democracy can work solely on the basis of a civil society only is a question that is not addressed in this chapter.738342 Instead we shall look into an example of one particular state with a long democratic tradition and a set of democratic structures in which civil society plays an important role. We shall look at one of the Scandinavian countries，Denmark，and focus specifically on the development and function of Danish civil society.

Formally Denmark became a liberal democracy in 1849.In contrast to other states in the mid-19^th century，Denmark experienced a regime shift from absolutism to democracy without a revolutionary upheaval. Most other countries had a revolution but no regime shift. The Danish constitution of 1849 did not bring about an actual democracy，in terms of equal rights and obligations for all. Women were still excluded from these democratic rights and so was a large group of the male population.738343 It seems fair to say that this first constitution was based upon an atomistic conception of society. Society solely consisted of individuals. Political leaders saw no need for political parties and interests organisations. Parts of the male population were given the right to vote for persons but not parties. After a decade，however，political parties began to emerge and different classes started to organise as interest groups in civil society.738344 This tendency to organise was intensified，and Denmark developed what could be termed a double democracy. On the one hand，the formal parliamentary liberal democracy emerged with its constitution，civil and political rights such as free elections and voting rights. On the other hand，Denmark developed a dense network of voluntary associations for promoting and defending the rights and interests of particular groups and classes. This strong element of free and voluntary associations representing various political，economical and ideological interests is a distinctive characteristic of the Danish version of democracy. Beyond any doubt，voluntary associations have played an enormous role in developing and consolidating a certain type of democratic culture. Such type of democracy based upon voluntary associations in civil society（which means both market and civil society in the conventional understanding）is often named associationalism.738345

Associationalism is an old doctrine with roots in various strands of 19^th and early 20^th century European social and political theory. It has its origins in the works of，among others，Tocqueville，Proudhon，Durkheim，Duguit in France，the English pluralists（Cole，Figgis，Laski，Barker，and Maitland），and von Gierke in Germany. In other words，it is a genuinely European social theory. Associationalism has been revitalised in recent years，mainly in a British context and most notably by Paul Hirst（1994；1997a；1997b）but also by some important contributors in the United States（Cohen and Rogers 1995）. This history of the theoretical development of associationalism is probably quite familiar to most scholars interested in this area of social and political theory. It is far less known that associationalism as a model of governance has been developed and implemented as a political practice in Denmark for more than a hundred years. This phenomenon is the primary concern of the present article.

Associationalism or associative democracy is a ‘political theory，the core proposition of which is that as many social activities as possible should be devolved to self-governing voluntary associations’（Bader 2001：1）. Voluntary associations must here be understood as any association created by citizens in civil society，no matter whether the purpose is to pursue economic interests（as in a trade union），political interests（a political party or any other politically oriented group）or social interests（sport，scout，film etc.）. Civil society in this definition includes the market（se below）（Hegel 1991 ［1821］）.

The purpose of the article is twofold：First we shall demonstrate that associationalism is not an old-fashioned idea or pure utopia. As already indicated，associationalism is a model of governance with a long tradition in Danish society. Associations contribute to a strengthening of the democratic aspect in education，social and cultural life and other welfare areas. The second purpose of this article is the consider associations in light of the state-civil society relationship. By examining some associational features of the Danish society，we seek to point out that civil society did not emerge from nothing. Civil society is not an autonomous sphere clearly separated from the state. On the contrary，it is a sphere of social life dependent upon the state. The state is the precondition for the development of civil society. Thus，we reject the conception of civil society，which can be found in much work on civil society and which most often depicts civil society as an autonomous sphere that develops as an entity independently from the state（e.g. Cohen & Arato 1992；Habermas 1996）. In this conception，civil society is seen as originating from individuals or groups who spontaneously form voluntary associations or social movements，sometimes in opposition to the state. The theoretical position in this article claims that civil society always must be seen as a sphere，which develops interdependently with the modern state. This is a general pattern and not only characteristic of Denmark. The state provides the basic conditions for the emergence and facilitates the further development of a civil society. The intervening state causes opposition or reaction from specific groups，and civil society emerges as a response to state policies or lack of the same.

In this chapter we begin by outlining the history of the rise of associational principles in Denmark going back to the end of the 18^th century during the time of absolutism. We proceed with an overview of the development of associationalism and describe how Denmark became a representative democracy supplemented with some associational features. It is beyond the scope of this paper to outline the quite complex model of governance we find in Denmark. Rather we shall limit ourselves to illustrating the associative dimension by examining more closely two areas in particular：First we briefly look into primary and secondary education，which，surprising to many，has an element of associationalism. Secondly，we examine the labour market in order to elucidate how voluntary associations without much state control have regulated it. During the 20^th century，the Danish labour market has become a more or less autonomous sphere in which two strongly centralised associations-representing the employers and the employees-have conducted negotiations without much state regulation. Finally，we shall discuss the problems and prospect of associationalism in the future Danish society. We will here focus on the utility of associationalism as an instrument for helping Danish society to cope with the problems of immigrants and asylum seekers？