Multilevel Governance in the European Union

Gary Marks

26 Régions

Non-intersecting jurisdictions . . .

100 Départements

. . . at a limited number of levels . . . across vastly different scales

342 Arrondissements 4,032 Cantons 36,680 Communes

Virtues and vices of multilevel governance

1. Efficiency 2. Peace 3. Democracy 4. Moral hazard 5. Corruption 6. Protest 7. Survival

#1 Efficiency

Centralize   where necessary encompass relevant externalities exploit economies of scale Decentralize where possible    Eurospeak: “

subsidiarity

” Lack of flexibility, innovation at central level Local circumstances and needs can be better identified at the local level Decentralization facilitates citizens’ participation in decision-making which induces better quality services

Match the scale of government to the scale of problem:      Local : town services Regional : water management National : health system, national defense Continental : cross-border pollution Global : climate change

Why multilevel governance NOW?

 From War (-1945) to Peace (1945-)  Affluence welfare, education, microeconomic policy, environment, health, transport

BRITAIN FRANCE

Regionalization in Europe

GERMANY Scottish, Welsh parliaments, 1997 Elected regional governments,1982 Federal constitution, 1949 ITALY SPAIN Elected regional governments, 1976. Strengthened, 1996.

Autonomous regions, 1978. Strengthened, 1993; 1998.

BELGIUM BRITAIN FRANCE GERMANY Regionalization in Europe Regions, communities, created in 1970. Strengthened 1980, 1989. Federal country since 1993.

Scottish, Welsh parliaments, 1997, 2001, 2008; London 2001 Elected regions, 1982; strengthened in 1986.

Federal constitution, 1949; reforms in 1964 and 1966 ITALY SPAIN SLOVAKIA Elected regions, 1976. Strengthened,1996, 2001.

Autonomous regions, 1978. Strengthened, 1993; 1998.

Regions created, 1996; elected since 2001.

#2 Peace

  

Allow distinct communities self-rule Combine communities in shared rule Encourage overarching identities

Ted Robert Gurr,

Minorities at Risk

#3 Dictators hate it

Dictators centralize authority Democratic leaders may (or may not) want multilevel governance

regionalization after democracy

Democratization facilitates regionalism

#4 Moral Hazard

Problem scenario: A) Spending is local B1) taxation is national or B2) Debts are national GREECE!

#5 Corruption

What if:  Weak rule of law  Corrupt social norms   Inadequate capacity at local level where a reform “mind-set” is not present at the local level BUT what if strong supranational institutions? E.g the EU.

#6 Protest

Basic dilemma:

Nationalism versus supranationalism

IDENTITY

50 40 30 20 10 0 national only national, european european, national european only Public Opinion Source: Commission (2002 survey), Public Opinion (Eurobarometer 2001)

Elites and public on Europe

Sources: a) elites, Intune (Fall 2007) b) public opinion: Eurobarometer 68 (Fall 2007)

Criticism on the radical right

REFERENDA ON EUROPE

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1971 80 1981 90 1991 00 2001 07 EU Referenda "NO" votes

#7: Survival

A growing number of policy problems are a) transnational and b) distributional

• • • • • • climate change nuclear proliferation financial regulation failing states biodiversity loss ocean exhaustion • • • • deforestation overfishing nuclear waste disposal refugees

T hese are INTERNATIONAL problems with winners and losers

national sovereignty is seriously suboptimal

6.6% 93.3% 85.0% 3.9% 11.1%

The European Union is the world’s most important experiment in multilevel governance

“Multilevel governance must be a priority.” José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission, 2009. “Develop as quickly as possible practical measures . . . with a view to strengthening multilevel governance.” October 2008 resolution of the European Parliament European Union Charter for Multilevel Governance CoR 2009