Abstract
This chapter scrutinises access as the entrance mechanisms local authorities dispose of towards their upper tiers of government. Apparent in much of the literature on intergovernmental relations conceptual consensus emerges on the existence of two main modes of vertical linkage: a direct and individual variant and an indirect and institutionalised counterpart. Empirically, this chapter concentrates on the latter form. Our measure determines the absence or presence of access through consultation and/or representation further distinguishing limited from substantial influence on higher-level policy-making. Our analysis shows that over time access has overall increased with a surge in a rather limited time frame. As general evolutions conceal similarities and differences between and/or within particular countries, we subsequently discuss the (evolving) scores for access of the latter, discerning between high, medium and low with(out) changes. Ultimately, two main trends stand out. The first is that by the end of our reference period in every country some form of consultation and/or representation existed. The second is an incremental and positive shift in the amount of influence on higher-level government policy-making. In many instances, consultation of local authorities’ associations is now routinised and/or their representation in intergovernmental forums institutionalised.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Whereas Hesse and Sharpe subdivided Northern Europe into an Anglo and North and Middle European Group, Loughlin and colleagues further distinguished a Scandinavian core and a Germanic periphery in the latter.
- 2.
Differentiating whether these meetings are routinised and/or have the authority to reach legally binding decisions.
- 3.
By structuring representation or the nature thereof (direct or indirect, majority or minority, scope in the second chamber) at the national level.
- 4.
As the discussion by countries clarifies, substantial variation in access exists between the cases situated in the CEE region. This also holds over time. When discerned, increases often well preceded accession. And some countries have indeed witnessed a decrease thereafter. Only in two Baltic states (Latvia and Lithuania) and in the formerly unified Czech and Slovak Republic, the momentum of EU accession seems to coincide with enhanced corporate access.
- 5.
In Switzerland and as an exception, the canton of Basel-Stadt has a score of 2 slightly lowering the overall mean.
- 6.
The small decrease in access (see column change) is due to the lowering of the number of local authorities in several regions of the United Kingdom (which was relatively more outspoken in Scotland and Wales than in England) affecting the scores on the weighted mean.
- 7.
For Turkey, Georgia and Croatia, there is no justification of the consistent score of 1.
References
Bolgherini, S., & Lippi, A. (2016). Italy: Remapping Local Government from Re-allocation and Re-shaping to Re-scaling. In U. Sadioglu & K. Dede (Eds.), Theoretical Foundations and Discussions on the Reformation Process in Local Governments (pp. 265–287). Hersey: IGI Global.
Coulson, A., & Campbell, A. (Eds.). (2008). Local Government in Central and Eastern Europe: The Rebirth of Local Democracy. London: Sage.
Council of Europe. (1985). European Charter of Local Self-Government. Strasbourg: COE.
Denters, B., & Rose, L. (Eds.). (2005). Comparing Local Governance: Trends and Developments. Houndmills: Palgrave.
Do Vale, H. (2015). Comparing and Measuring Subnational Autonomy Across Three Continents. Lex Localis – The Journal of Local Self-Government, 13(3), 741–764.
Goldsmith, M. (1992). Local Government. Urban Studies, 29(3), 393–410.
Goldsmith, M., & Page, E. (2010). Introduction. In M. Goldsmith & E. Page (Eds.), Changing Government Relations in Europe. From Localism to Intergovernmentalism (pp. 1–13). London: Routledge.
Hesse, J., & Sharpe, L. (1991). Local Government in International Perspective: Some Comparative Observations. In J. Hesse (Ed.), Local Government and Urban Affairs in International Perspective. Analyses of Twenty Western Industrialized Countries (pp. 603–621). Baden-Baden: Nomos-Verlagsgesellschaft.
Hooghe, L., Marks, G., Schakel, A., Osterkatz, S., Niedzwiecki, S., & Shair-Rosenfield, S. (2016). Measuring Regional Authority: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance (Vol. I). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
John, P., & Copus, C. (2011). The United Kingdom: Is There Really an Anglo Model? In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Local and Regional Democracy in Europe (pp. 27–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kuhlmann, S., & Bouckaert, G. (Eds.). (2016). Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis. National Trajectories and International Comparisons. London: Palgrave.
Ladner, A., Keuffer, N., & Baldersheim, H. (2016). Measuring Local Autonomy in 39 Countries. Regional & Federal Studies, 26(3), 321–357.
Loughlin, J., Hendriks, F., & Lidström, A. (2011). Subnational Democracy in Europe: Changing Backgrounds and Theoretical Models. In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Local and Regional Democracy in Europe (pp. 1–23). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Page, E. (1991). Localism and Centralism in Europe. The Political and Legal Bases of Local Self-Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Page, E., & Goldsmith, M. (1987a). Centre and Locality: Functions, Access and Discretion. In E. Page & M. Goldsmith (Eds.), Central and Local Government Relations. A Comparative Analysis of West European States (pp. 3–11). London: Sage.
Page, E., & Goldsmith, M. (1987b). Centre and Locality: Explaining Cross-National Variation. In E. Page & M. Goldsmith (Eds.), Central and Local Government Relations. A Comparative Analysis of West European States (pp. 156–168). London: Sage.
Sellers, J., & Lidström, A. (2007). Decentralization, Local Government, and the Welfare State. Governance, 20(4), 609–632.
Soós, G. (2010). Hungary. In M. Goldsmith & E. Page (Eds.), Changing Government Relations in Europe. From Localism to Intergovernmentalism (pp. 108–126). London: Routledge.
Sootla, G., & Kattai, K. (2011). Estonia: Challenges and Lessons of the Development of Local Autonomy. In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Local and Regional Democracy in Europe (pp. 576–595). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swianiewicz, P. (2005). Cities in Transition. From Statism to Democracy. In M. Haus, H. Heinelt, & M. Stewart (Eds.), Urban Governance and Democracy. Leadership and Community Involvement (pp. 102–128). London: Routledge.
Vetter, A. (2010). Germany. In M. Goldsmith & E. Page (Eds.), Changing Government Relations in Europe. From Localism to Intergovernmentalism (pp. 88–107). London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ladner, A. et al. (2019). Vertical Access. In: Patterns of Local Autonomy in Europe. Governance and Public Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95642-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95642-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95641-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95642-8
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)