Comparative Territorial Politics and Policy

Federalism is a contested political institution. The integrity of the British devolved union and the supranational European Union (EU) were put into question over the last several years by popular referendums on nations’ continued membership. Yet, at the same time, greater federalism seems to be the answer for responding to nationalist demands for self-government and to govern the troubled economies of the Eurozone. The stability of federal systems has also been tested by central governments’ centralizing response to the contemporary financial crisis and global recession, fuelling tensions with regional governments. But regional autonomy nevertheless seems to be resilient. It continues to be at the source of variation between regions in the way in which they make policy and the way in which their governments are held accountable by electorates. More and more, place makes a difference to how people live, to the services they receive, to how they interact with public authorities, and to how they vote. This difference has also made it imperative for the constituent parts of federations to coordinate their actions with each other and with the federal government in order to ensure a consistency of approaches across the country. This Section invites Panels that seek to address these topics and that examine: how and why federal institutions have become contested, what differences federalism makes to political competition and public policy and how federal institutions work in practice. 1. Elections and Political Accountability in Multi-Level Systems Chair: Arjan Schakel (Maastricht) This Panel invites Papers that study the impact of multilevel governance on political parties and elections, including such issues as party organisation, party strategies, and democratic accountability and vote choices. The Panel invites Papers that aim to answer questions such as: How do statewide parties organise in multilevel states? What is the impact of autonomist/regionalist parties on the strategies of statewide parties and on the governance of the state? Do citizens distinguish areas of responsibility between different levels of government? Are regional elections second order or do voters cast their choice based on regional-level issues and performance. The Panel welcomes Papers adopting a comparative perspective that employ cross-national and comparative case analyses. 2. Sub-state nationalist and regionalist parties and the European Union Chair: Coree Brown Swan (Edinburgh) and Nicola McEwen (Edinburgh) The Eurozone crisis, the refugee crisis, and the prospect of Brexit have presented significant challenges to the European Union and the project of European integration. This Panel will examine how sub-state nationalist and regionalist parties have responded to these challenges. Do those that had previously adopted a pro-European platform still present the EU as a secure framework within which self-government can be exercised? Or have they retreated into more conventional notions of self-government and independence from both the existence member-state and the EU? This panel will bring together case study and comparative papers on sub-state nationalist and regionalist parties, exploring how they have responded to a Europe in transition. 3. Regional Public Policy Convergence and Divergence Chair: Simon Toubeau (Nottingham) This Panel aims to address the question of what determines the policy decisions of regional governments and what shapes the patterns of policy convergence and divergence between the regions of multi-level states. The panel wishes to examine how structural, institutional, ideational and political factors interact to produce patterns of convergence and divergence across different policy areas related to the management of regional space, the regional economy and the regional identity, such as: economic policy, energy, transport and environment policy; welfare policy; education, culture and language policy; immigration and integration policy. The Panel welcome Papers adopting a plurality of methods and approaches, from single-case studies, comparative case-studies and quantitative analyses, applied in regions across a range of multi-level systems. 4. Accountability, democratic scrutiny and intergovernmental coordination Chair: Bettina Petersohn (Swansea) In multi-level and federal systems, policy-making necessitates communication and coordination between executives. The increase in amount and complexity of intergovernmental coordination, however, impacts on the relation between executive and legislatures at national and regional levels. If decision-making shifts to an extra-parliamentary arena, intergovernmental coordination may also raise questions of democratic accountability and hinder effective legislative oversight. Often, parliaments and parliamentarians are said to have lost power as a consequence of the increase in intergovernmental coordination and in particular as a result of European integration. With regard to the EU, national parliaments have recently started to reclaim their role in scrutinising the executives with the introduction of the Early Warning System. The Panel welcomes Papers that study the relationship between increased executive coordination (vertical or horizontal) and executive-legislative relations in multi-level polities. 5. Reassessing dual and co-operative federalism: European and international perspectives Chair: Wolfgang Renzsch (Magdeburg) This Panel invites Papers that explore the differences in policy outcomes produced by cooperative and dual federal systems. Cooperative federal systems (Germany, Austria, EU) divide legislation from implementation, while in dual federal systems (Canada, USA) legislation and implementation go hand in hand. The Panel wishes to examine the consequences of these institutional arrangements for federal financing and inter-governmental relations. In addition, the Panel welcomes Papers that study the historical evolution of each system, in particular with regard to the sequencing of other major political developments such as state formation, welfare state building and democratization. 6. Comparing intergovernmental relations Chair: Donna Wood (University of Victoria) and Nicola McEwen (Edinburgh) In federal and multi-level political systems, virtually every area of public policy affecting the lives of Canadians is shaped by how the constitution divides responsibilities between the orders of government, and how they work together (or don't). Many pressing policy challenges – from the environment, energy resilience, demographic change, immigration, security, employment and the economy, defy constitutional divisions of power and require close collaboration between the federal, meso-level and municipal governments. The aim of this Panel will be to adopt different comparative perspectives on intergovernmental relations to (i) assess the dynamics of IGR across space and time (ii) to identify the relative impact of variables such as policy sector, the strength and political composition of governments, party ideology, territorial diversity, and the supranational/international political environment; and (iii) to identify whether there are best practice lessons that can inform IGR institutional design and operation across cases.