questions.
Another set of empirical questions relates to political recruitment. Traditionally, regional legislatures have been viewed as a springboard for political careers, providing an apprenticeship for national office, and allowing aspiring legislators to hone their political skills as well as build a reputation and a political base.
More complex patterns may now be emerging, however. Legislators may be satisfied with a career at the regional level, as it can offer greater opportunities for making a difference and may be less disruption to family life than working in the national capital. Some may return from the national to the regional level, having found it more challenging to build networks of influence there in an effort to bring about meaningful change. Many regional parties have limited representation at the national level, restricting the opportunities to move there. In Europe, the possibility of a career at the European level offers an additional dimension.
These complex patterns provide challenges of categorization, and require careful and thorough empirical research, which is now well underway.
[15] Acknowledgments
This book is intended chiefly to analyze how governments and civil societies adapt to challenges from the new environment, particularly those pertaining to supra- and substate dynamics. The concept of multilevel governance gives us the elements we need to better evaluate political conflicts and outcomes across various levels of government and examine how institutions, political parties, social movements, business organizations and politicians move within this new environment.
We would first like to thank the Valencian Regional Government and the University of Valencia (Spain), where the collaborators on this book first gathered for preliminary discussions on the new forms of governance and trends observed in recent years. We also owe a debt of gratitude to Sanda Sijercic and Tristan Masson, who reviewed the chapters and provided a theoretical viewpoint on the contributions from collaborators. A special word of thanks goes out to Claude Berlinguette, who coordinated this special project sponsored by the International Political Science Association (IPSA), and Prof. Wyn Grant, who served as Chair of the Program Committee for the 22nd IPSA World Congress in Madrid 2012 and believed the issue of multilevel governance was crucial to the development of our discipline.
[17] Introduction
Borders and Margins: Federalism, Devolution and Multilevel Governance
Guy Lachapelle and Pablo Oñate
Introduction
Multilevel governance (MLG) is the watchword in an increasing number of countries, nowadays, with multiple layers of government given a say in the adoption of political decisions and the allocation of resources. A wide variety of examples can be cited, from strong federal systems to regionally decentralized states. The final decades of the 20th century witnessed the emergence of a new kind of regionalism (the new regionalism) marked by a political (cultural and institutional) structure rather than economic arrangements. The terms used to summarize these factors include internationalization and globalization, reactivation or emergence of regional identities and culture, reinforcement of substate focal points (both local and regional) for economic development, and social regulation and collective action.
Various forms of new regionalism have set the stage for the emergence or reinforcement of institutions that play a part in shaping multilevel political systems, depending on the scope of substate cultural traditions and the presence of social and economic institutions and networks. These substate tiers of government differ regarding the extent of self-government and the existence of successful non-state-wide parties (or strong regional organizations of statewide parties). Regardless of the capacity for self-government, however, regions work as relevant arenas for political decision-making, resource allocation and political debate. Many countries have turned to MLG as a way of organizing political-institutional activity thereby spawning a field for political and social research.
At its core, this book was born of our conviction that MLG is a useful concept for capturing the increasingly complex and shared nature of public decision-making in federal and non-federal systems, especially in the age of global competition. MLG also relates to the notion of asymmetrical federalism or the principle of subsidiarity, according to which political and financial responsibility is conferred on the level of government best able to meet the needs of citizens. And even if these new regionalisms go beyond a functional [18] framework for political life, globalization and the issue of sustainable development should be perceived as an opportunity to create new partnerships between levels of government, civil society and the private sector with the goal of fostering the conditions for better investment and promoting fair and participative projects. Governments should propose treaties, trade agreements and regulations calling for better cooperation between levels of governance, therefore. In this way, MLG is viewed as a system of governance within or between states. The aim of this book, therefore, is to show readers how this concept, within its normative and empirical meanings, can offer an analytical framework for the study of intergovernmental relationships.
The collaborators herein emphasize the cooperative nature of MLG, a strong federalist or functional regional system, and the non-conflictual resolution of policy problems in concurrent political arenas. This book offers a fresh perspective on new means of governance that meet citizens’ needs. The first section explores the concept of MLG and its use in multinational societies, while the second analyzes the issue of trust-mistrust and how it shapes central-regional-local relationships. The third, meanwhile, looks to a new dimension of international relations: the increasing role of substate entities in world debates and trade regulations. The fourth section looks more specifically at how globalization and MLG have reshaped the role and functions of political parties and party systems. Finally, since we are talking about the emergence of a new system of governance, the book studies its effects on the behavior and attitudes of parliamentary representatives.
I
In Chapter 1, Michael Stein and Lisa Turkewitsch provide an initial analysis of this concept, applying it to federations and decentralized unitary systems, such as those in Germany and the United Kingdom (UK). The concept of MLG, they argue, is a fairly recent one, emerging with the deepening integration of the European Union in the early 1990s, and drawing its basic structure from the ideas and institutions created in conjunction with the signing of the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. Moving from this historical context to present-day situations, Stein and Turkewitsch cite the United Kingdom and Germany as modern examples illustrating the limitations of and emerging patterns in MLG theory, first highlighting its strengths and weaknesses and comparing it to more traditional approaches, namely those of neo-functionalism, neo-institutionalism (both decentralized and multinational federalism), and centralized unitarism. They also include contributions to MLG theory that further highlight its utility as a comparative analytical tool, especially in relation to the UK and [19] Germany. In comparing these two EU polities – which share demographic and institutional similarities – they show that the ability to conceptualize these nations within traditional frameworks has eroded considerably. This is particularly the case for the UK, where the MLG framework, Stein and Turkewitsch suggest, may be best adapted to the British climate. And while the UK, in its political development, may require a suitable theoretical framework, Germany, for its part, has long-standing historical ties to MLG theory through the study of German federalism. MLG theory may be viewed as an extension of federalism, therefore, and may be used to analyze features of federal and decentralized unitary systems as well as the EU, as Stein and Turkewitsch note, citing the German state, which encompasses both types of MLG. Because it is better suited to analyzing the changes in these polities, both now and in the future, the flexible MLG framework, the authors believe, lends itself to a more accurate assessment of changing forms of governance than traditional comparative theories.
In his chapter on “Problems of Democratic Accountability in Network and Multilevel Governance,” Yannis Papadopoulos analyzes democratic accountability in MLG systems. While MLG networks generate new and novel forms of accountability, he argues, its democratic dimension poses a problem, owing to the inherent structure of MLG