Federalism, Regionalism and the Governance of Diversity in Europe and Beyond

Section Chair- Professor Surinder K Shukla, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India Co-Chair- Professor Dirk-Berg Schlosser, University of Marburg, Germany Federalism, Regionalism and the Governance of Diversity in Europe and Beyond Aim Aim of this session panel is to study federalism regionalism and governance in diversity as a discourse and practice in social transformation in Europe and beyond. Objective Objective of this session panel is to reexamine rhetoric, action and impact of federalism, regionalism and governance of diversity in Europe and beyond. In present times, the importance of Federal structure is only increasing as despite the difference of size, language , culture and economy the federating units have one mission, one goal, that is, development. They have a common fear also- the absence of federal structure, democracy degenerates into semi-democracy and even guided democracy. On the other hand, where federalism exists, the stress on federal structure has led to organizing and reorganizing the boundaries of the federating units along religious or language line .This is the resultant factor of the inability of the modern liberal state and its underlying political processes to deal effectively with the diverse claims of rights put forward by highly mobilized identities. The response of the government is often ad hoc. Among the special rights claimed by regional identities are: a) Special representation rights, devolution and national self-determination b) Special rights seeking accommodation of cultural and educational rights Pattern of electoral support in the federating units requires that these issues are addressed squarely along with the issue of economic freedom. Greater economic freedom is surely associated with growth at the federal level. But how do we calculate economic freedom? Variables and methodology for the calculation need to be employed for the calculation in states European and beyond. Development is a notion which demands a qualitative shift in the attitudes of people involved, to generate experiences which facilitate altered perceptions of the self image as well as social image .Conceptually, development is to be understood as internalized growth , and, therefore, not a matter of handing down schemes. Fundamental questions in modern federalism and governance in diversity include access to : Legal redress Environmental issues Women-and issue of their security Focus on evolving culture as a result of speedy changes that have engulfed the present society resulting from sharp technological development. Discourse research is the key methodology of research in social science and can be used to analyse issues of federalism and governance . Feminist perspective needs to be taken into consideration also in order to examine the rhetoric and action involved in the process of social transformation. There is a paradigm shift today and the federal structures and governments need to address the issue of biodiversity. Are societal benefits not derived from the fabric of ecosystem ? Then the framing of transition to sustainability brings the individual to the forefront and also issue like : Human dignity Global environment change Demoracy- participatory democracy in the context of inclusion and exclusion ; and representation and accountability Functioning of earth-state/federating units together Is individual in the federating units the key to development ? We need to develop responsible citizens having a balance in life , love and affection. It is a personal agenda ,like education. Will such a citizen weaken or strengthen the federal structure and governance ? Do we need assertive or aggressive citizens ? There is a need to revisit the issue of federalism and governance in diversity in Europe and beyond to rethink the relationship between citizen, state and federal structure. We need to understand better how the societal knowledge generated at the level of data and theories can explain the issue and transmit the same horizontally across disciplines, vertically to the policy-maker and grass root activist, and temporally across the generations Beyond Europe – the context of India A vast geographic expanse, India’s choice of a federal structure was more of a necessity at the time of its inception in 1947. Besides Westminster model was the only method of governance known to elitist clients of Indian polity. The members of Constituent Assembly believed that the federal structure was required to address the plural set-up in India which was deeply stratified along lines of caste, language and religion. People lived in largely the rural territory as urbanism was yet in state of microcosm. But more than sixty years after independence and despite division of powers clearly laid down in the Constitution, there still exist palpable centre-state tensions relating to issues of the federal structure. The pattern of governance has not been able to bridge the gap in matters relating to centre-state relations. The centre-state tensions have been addressed from time to time, the last exercise was done by Sarkaria Commission. More recently another commission has been set up under Justice Puncchi to make recommendations for ensuring smoother centre-state relations. The politics of territorial governance in India revolves around two variants- economic and political. The Planning Commission reviews and recommends allocation of funds to the states for the purpose of development. The centre-periphery bias for disbursement of funds is much resented by states. The classic example is that of state of Punjab which almost broke out of the Union under the Khalistan move which gathered momentum after ‘Operation Bluestar’. Although centre-state tensions are prevalent in most democratic states, there is a need to locate methodology for striking a balance between the federal and regional centres of power. What lessons can be drawn from the experience of difficult plurinationalism in India? How far identities, which have crystallized since eighties, impact the federal-regional tussle for power? What is the role of “sons of soil theory” in determining the relationship? How the question of “we” and “they” was addressed by India’s political structure? Session Chair : Professor Surinder K Shukla