Some models (here: linear regression) have parameters $\beta$:
$$ \hat{y} = \sum_{i\in\{1..p\}} \beta_i x_i + \beta_0 $$
For the same number of input features, more complex models (here: basis expansion to a quadratic model) have more parameters:
$$ \hat{y} = \sum_{i,j\in\{1..p\} \atop i\le j} \beta_{ij} x_ix_j + \sum_{i\in\{1..p\}} \beta_{i} x_i + \beta_0 $$
In general, models with more parameters are more flexible (because there are more parameters to tune to fit the model to the data), but are more difficult to fit and thus more likely tend to overfit. Regularization helps overcome these problems by reducing the degrees of freedom for tuning, thus reducing the complexity a bit:
$$ \hat{y} = \sum_{i,j\in\{1..p\} \atop i\le j} \beta_{ij} x_ix_j + \sum_{i\in\{1..p\}} \beta_{i} x_i + \beta_0 \textrm{, with} \sum \beta^2 \textrm{ small} $$
We can express the 'model complexity' or 'degrees of freedom for tuning' in terms of 'effective parameters': For the model that you investigate, find the parameter-based model (without regularization) that has the same degree of freedom for tuning. The number of parameters for that model is the effective number of parameters for your model.
This generalization can also be extended further to models that are not based on parameters (e.g. k nearest neighbor). Then the degree of complexity is known as Vapnik–Chervonenkis (VC) dimension. Conveniently, for (non-regularized) linear regression, it is $p+1$, the actual number of parameters.
Elements of Statistical Learning, section 7.9, gives more information about that (and they seem to use the terms 'VC', 'effective number of parameters' and 'model complexity' more or less interchangably).