1 / 36

federalism and decentralization

federalism and decentralization. Gov1109 #5. Recap: classes So far…. Choices & processes of constitution-building Power-sharing or power-concentrating Elite-led top-down or inclusive bottom-up processes Key building blocks: pros and cons of each… Electoral systems and processes

thiery
Download Presentation

federalism and decentralization

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. federalism and decentralization Gov1109 #5

  2. Recap: classes So far… • Choices & processes of constitution-building • Power-sharing or power-concentrating • Elite-led top-down or inclusive bottom-up processes • Key building blocks: pros and cons of each… • Electoral systems and processes • Majoritarian, mixed, proportional • Sub-type variations • Types of executives • Presidential, mixed, parliamentary executives • Horizontal power-sharing • Types of federalism and decentralization • Vertical power-sharing

  3. Today’s Structure • Why the growth of multilevel governance? • Comparing normative arguments for and against decentralization • Many types of federalism and decentralization • The impact of federalism on democracy • Case studies – India and Bangladesh, Brazil, Japan, Russia and Sweden: one size does not fit all? • Discussion seminar papers

  4. Resources • Norris Ch 7 • Devas and Delay ‘Local democracy…’ Local Government Studies • Andrews and de Vries ‘High expectations…’ IRAS • Online: • Forum of Federations www.forumfed.org

  5. 1. Growth of multilevel governance

  6. 1. Growth of multilevel governance- why?

  7. Why growing decentralization worldwide? (Ref Devas and Delay) • Bottom-up demand; • Reaction against perceived failures of the central state • eg post-Communist Europe • Aspirations of nationalist movements • Eg Spain, Belgium, United Kingdom, Canada, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russia • Post-war peace-building process • Eg Uganda, South Africa, Cambodia, Iraq • Role of international development agencies • Part of the neo-liberal ‘Washington consensus’ • Eg World Bank

  8. 2. Normative claims: the pros and cons of decentralization

  9. Normative debate: Claims in favor • Gives citizens multiple points of access, enhancing opportunities for public participation • Increases the accountability and responsiveness of elected officials to local citizens (voice to the poor) • Local accountability lessens corruption eg social audits • Flexible policy learning (see what ‘works’) • Managerial efficiency; smaller units • Closer to customers; service delivery tailored to local needs • In divided societies, accommodates cultural autonomy eg languages and religious schools • More stability and less communal conflict (Nancy Bermeo, Alf Stephan)

  10. Normative debate: Claims against • Overlapping multilevel roles and responsibilities reduces accountability and responsibility (‘buck stops…?’) • Reinforces geographic inequalities (eg in welfare benefits, natural resource revenue) • Maximizes opportunities for corruption • Managerial duplication, redundancies, coordination costs, bureaucratic inefficiencies (eg electoral management) • Multiple veto points; slowness to respond • In divided societies, can encourage ethno-nationalist regional parties and lead to succession and national break-up, whether peaceful (Czechoslovakia 1993) or violent (Pakistan 1971, Yugoslavia) • Violence and continued conflict in the Russian Federation (in Chechnya?), in the Basque region of Spain, in India (in Kashmir), Nigeria, and Sudan (in Darfur). • Effects may depend upon state boundaries and party competition (Brancanti)

  11. Designing decentralization: (Devas and Delay) • Size of units and number of levels • Impact on administrative costs and citizen participation • Structure for political accountability • Single or plural executive, type of electoral system, use of reserved seats • Mechanisms for citizen engagement • Periodic elections, citizen consultation, local audits, direct citizen decision-making eg budgets (next class) • Financial structure • Local taxes: property, income, business, vehicles • Weak expenditure management; unequal resources in districts • Center-local relations • Tensions between local accountability and central grants • Impact on service delivery, poverty and corruption • Varied impacts; mixed evidence; depends on above factors “What matters is how that system is designed and implemented.”

  12. 3. Many types of federalism and decentralization

  13. Concepts: decentralization • Decentralization: definition • “The transfer of roles and responsibilities from the central government to different sub-national units” • Types • Administrative decentralization • Local agents of central government eg education department • Bureaucratic decision-making authority and managerial responsibilities for the delivery and regulation of public services and for raising revenues are transferred from the central government to sub-national tiers. • May reinforce, not reduce, central control • Fiscal decentralization • Locally-determined taxes and spending • Strengthen accountability by linking expenditure for local services and goods with source of revenues • Use central performance indices • Political decentralization • To an elected body with some degree of local autonomy • Direct engagement of local citizens in local decisions

  14. FISCAL AND POLITICAL decentralization • Why these contrasts? • Physical size? • Culture and colonial legacies? • Plural societies? • Levels of democracy Norris ch 7

  15. Concepts and types of federalism • Federal regimes: definitions • “An association of states, which are formed for certain common purposes, but in which the member states retain a large portion of their original independence.” (K. Wheare) • “The combination of shared-rule for some purposes and regional self-rule for others within a single political system so that neither is subordinate to the other.” (Watts)

  16. Federal countries (24/193 nations) • Argentina • Australia • Austria • Belgium • Bosnia and Herzegovina • Brazil • Canada • Comoros • Ethiopia • Germany • India • Malaysia • Mexico • Micronesia • Nepal • Nigeria • Pakistan • Russia • St. Kitts and Nevis • South Africa • Spain • Switzerland • United Arab Emirates • United States of America • Venezuela

  17. Distribution of types

  18. Multiple Types (Lijphart 1999)

  19. Types of federal and decentralized regimes Figure 7.2: Matrix of vertical power-sharing arrangements Note: See the text for definitions of each type of constitution and the measures of decentralization which are used. The numbers in parenthesis represent the distribution of each type out of 191 contemporary states worldwide in 2000. Source: Norris Driving Democracy

  20. 4. The impact of federalism on democracy and democratization

  21. Trends in democracy by type Note: The standardized 100-point scale of democracy is described in Table 3.1. The scale measures Liberal Democracy (Freedom House 2000). For the classification of types of constitution, see text.

  22. Impact on democracy Note: The type of constitution was classified using the definitions defined in the text according to data derived from Griffiths (2005), Watts (1999), and Banks (2004). The standardized 100-point scales of democracy are described in Table 3.1. The four scales measure Liberal Democracy (Freedom House 2000), Constitutional Democracy (Polity IV 2000), Participatory Democracy (Vanhanen 2000), and Contested Democracy (Cheibub and Gandhi 2000). When tested by ANOVA, the difference between mean scores are all significant (at the p=.001 level).

  23. Federalism strengthens democracy

  24. 5. Case-studies

  25. Case studies: India v Bangladesh

  26. Indian states

  27. Indian federalism & decentralization • Federal Republic; 1947 Indian independence; 1950 new Constitution: • Mixed Executive: Elected President PratibhaPATIL, Prime Minister ManmohanSINGH • LokSabha(545 MPs, first-past-the-post simple plurality) • Pop 1.1 bn (country 1/3rd size of US) • Religions: Hindu 80.5%, Muslim 13.4%, Christian 2.3%, Sikh 1.9%, other 1.8% • Languages: Hindi 41%, Bengali 8.1%, Telugu 7.2%, Marathi 7%, Tamil 5.9%, Urdu 5%, Gujarati 4.5%, Kannada 3.7%, Malayalam 3.2%, Oriya 3.2%, Punjabi 2.8%, Assamese 1.3%, Maithili 1.2%, other 5.9% • Federalism: Divided into 28 states and 7 union territories • First-past the post elections for legislative assemblies, states vary in size by pop. • Asymetrical federalism: special provisions for Jammu and Kashmir • Decentralization: 1992, the 73rd amendment strengthened rural and village councils (panchayats), new powers and funding, women must hold at least one-third of the seats on these bodies.

  28. Brazil, japan, russia and sweden • Ref Andrews and de Vries • Decentralization is a common policy among international agencies • Decentralization is usually assumed to enhance citizen empowerment, allocation efficiency and decision-making. • Yet many negative consequences, one size does not fit all, context matters, impact on popular participation varies • ‘Most different’ research strategy: Brazil, japan, Sweden and Russia • See Table 1 and Fig 1

  29. Context matters?

  30. Diverse cases: Andrews and de Vries

  31. Survey evidence

  32. effects

  33. Conclusions: Andrews and de Vries

  34. General Conclusions • Diverse types of federations and forms of sub-national decentralization; not equivalent • Decentralization growing (political, administrative and fiscal) but federalism is more difficult to change • Federalism usually strengthens democracy • Complex to analyze the other types of effects • Many conditions probably matter in plural societies, including the boundaries drawn across or within ethnic communities, and types of parties. • Pros and cons?

  35. Next class Human rights

More Related