Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

Two themes of particular significance in the changing world of local government are examined: the growing pressures to incorporate participatory and direct forms of democracy into local government; and the varied use of a complex structure of nongovernmental organisations as part of local governance. Two main forms of democracy with participation are discussed: direct democracy and participatory democracy. Differences between them are explained and the demands for them in transitional and established democracies are described. The different ways in which ‘third sector’ bodies are involved in local governance are explored and their contribution to local democratisation assessed. Innovations in participation and the involvement of the third sector can revitalise local democracy.

Results of the comparative study presented in this paper suggests that local government organization influences land-use planning, and local development strategies and disparities. Local government reforms can, therefore, serve to modify spatial patterns of development and disparities. Based on a review of studies made in the developed and the developing world, the author provides a comparative perspective on these influences. Five major dimensions of local government organization—territorial, functional, political autonomy, fiscal, and electoral—are used to define four extreme models of local government. The American self-government model leads to substantial inequalities and to considerable sprawl. The Western welfare-state model alleviates these problems somewhat, but at a cost to central government. Its positive impact is also dependent on norms of administration at the central level, whereas reduced competition over economic development has its negative sides. Developing-world-type centralism has no real advantages in terms of development or disparities. The developing-world decentralized model can be regarded as a transitional phase towards either the self-government or the welfare-state models. Its implementation has been partial; hence its impact has, so far, been rather small.

The author aims at a comparative analysis of the development of local government systems in Britain, France, and Germany. First, he makes the point that, during the historical evolution of the local government systems of the three countries over the last century, their institutional profiles have exhibited an almost classical divergence. Against this historical background the author pursues answers to the questions of whether, to what degree, and why the local government systems of the three countries have, in their more recent development, shown institutional convergence. Among the factors possibly fostering such convergence, the following are highlighted in the paper: the internationalisation (‘globalisation’) of socioeconomic and political challenges and institutional responses to them.

By means of case studies of Slovak cities, the author focuses on decentralisation processes at the local level, paying special attention to the role of local self-government during the transformation period in Central and Eastern Europe. Four main directions of sublocal decentralisation are considered: political decentralisation, managerial decentralisation, decentralisation to the so-called ‘third sector’, and decentralisation to the private or mixed sector. Cities have constituted ‘Councils in City Quarters’ as a tool for the improvement of local democracy and as an aid to more flexible local self-government. The previously state-controlled municipal sector has also been changed to a group of municipal, public – private, and private companies involved in delivery of local services, resulting in enhanced efficiency. A wide range of local functions took over the third sector—from delivery of particular services to the reconciling of many local interests. Sublocal decentralisation processes, although not yet complete, appear very promising and confirm the ability to cope with the transitional situation at the local level. An important feature is that the initial top-down control of the local level transformation has been replaced with an active and more autonomous role of local self-governments following the consolidation period. Slovak transition at the local level also documents the role of local self-government as hard to replace in the facilitation of local civil society building and highlights a need for a local democracy which is more complex in nature.

Six distinct though related strands of ‘enabling’ as applied to the ability of local governments to engage in innovative methods of service delivery are distinguished. The practice of ‘enabling’ is analysed to identify possible advantages, obstacles, and disadvantages. Contracting can secure economies and strengthen the local economy but can cause problems of accountability. Consumerism may extend service-user choice but can be tokenistic for dependent clients and claimants. Community planning forces elected representatives to consider the impact on the community of the actions of all local decisionmakers but can be negated by central controls. Leadership can mobilise community resources from the commercial and not-for-profit sectors but is incompatible with the proliferation of nonaccountable agencies. Self-help can improve service responsiveness but is not necessarily democratically organised or empowering. Participation can empower but its commonest forms are weak. Concepts of enabling show how conventional local government can create innovative local governance.

Policy network analysis (PNA) and the advocacy coalition framework (ACF) are relatively recent additions to the toolbox of policy analysis. The author explores the strengths and limitations of each through comparative application. The two frameworks are used to analyse policy change and stability in the UK industrial pollution sector over a period of more than twenty-five years. Innovations derived from policy-oriented learning generated in the 1970s were initially rejected before being implemented fourteen years later. The case study illustrates the limits of both theories. Change was not an open competition between advocates of different core policy beliefs. Nevertheless the ACF analysis of contrasting, broadly defined, beliefs can help explain some events beyond policy networks. Resource interdependencies in the policy network provide a good explanation for the stabilities exhibited in the case study. PNA can also explain why some actors were excluded from the policy process whereas others exercised decisionmaking and nondecisionmaking power. In combination, the more fundamental agency-oriented and structure-oriented emphases on beliefs and resources associated with the ACF and PNA, respectively, can enrich policy analysis.

In this study we assess whether the two major political parties and their presidential candidates played any role in mobilizing public support for environmentalism, as compared with economic issues. Our empirical analysis is based on (1) content analysis of the party platforms, (2) content analysis of campaign rhetoric, and (3) identification of ‘attentive’ publics in the electorate. Over the period 1972–92 no fewer than 12% of respondents mentioned economics but no more than 3.9% mentioned purely environmental concerns. We conclude that the environmental policy agenda did not originate from two-party electoral competition.