Are Democratic Local Government Institutions Corroding or Corrosion Resistant in an Age of New Public Governance?

Are democratic local government institutions corroding or corrosion resistant in an age of New Public Governance? Panel title: Top Civil servants and politicians in local government: Emerging patterns of Institutions, National Cultures and Leadership Authors: Dag Olaf Torjesen, Charlotte Kiland & Tor-Ivar Karlsen In the governance literature a dominant assumption has been that traditional political and administrative institutions have lost its power, are weakened or “hollowed-out” in favor of other actors. The distinction between the public and the private sector, between business and politics and between civil society and the state, is blurred and complex networks of cooperation arise (Kooiman 1993). It seems to be taken for granted that a shift from hierarchy to more steering through networks, horizontal relations and cooperation (Rhodes 1996, 2007; Sørensen & Torfing 2007; Ansell & Torfing 2016). Research on the Scandinavian countries concludes that the power of traditional, democratic local government institutions has diminished during the last decades, limiting the possibility for local steering and leadership (SOU 1990:44; Togeby et al 2003; Tranvik & Fimreite 2006; Østerud et al 2003). However, Jacobsen (2009) is questioning the “hollowing-out” assumption, arguing that traditional political and administrative institutions vary to what degree they are “hollowed-out” (Jacobsen 2009). Following the same line, we will ask the question: who and which interest influence local government and to which extent are the traditional local government institutions eroding and losing power to other actors? Empirically, the paper is based on a Danish survey among top civil servants in Danish municipalities, conducted in May 2016 (Berthelsen & Hansen 2016) and collated to a similar Norwegian survey conducted in 2017 (Karlsen et al. 2017). By using a variant of the reputational method for studying power, top civil servants in local government in Denmark and Norway were asked to assess the power and influence to different actors; mayors, local politicians, the political local council, the local administration, the region, the state, national party leaders, local media, union representatives, local pressure and interest groups, NGOs, and private business. The main conclusion is that four main actors are clearly perceived as more powerful than other actors; the top civil servants (municipal chief executive officers and municipal administration managers), the mayors, the local political council and the union representatives. Other actors were deemed less influential, indicating that hierarchical government structures are still highly influential. Thus, the empirical findings show that government seems to be a more appropriate concept than governance. In addition, the perceived power of local authorities varies across countries (Denmark and Norway), across municipalities and within municipalities. The local government institutions, seems also to vary regarding to what degree they are “hollowed-out”, dependent on municipal size, administrative leadership level and policy field etc. Additionally, we will discuss variations between Denmark and Norway and controlling for individual differences (gender, age, experience, education) and differences in institutional contexts; municipal size, administrative leadership level, political organizational model (the Danish collegiality model and the Norwegian council-committee model) and policy fields/ sectors.