Federal Dynamics in Canada, the United States, and Switzerland: How Substates' Internal Organization Affects Intergovernmental Relations

This article argues that internal substate dynamics can systematicallyaccount for the organization of intergovernmental relations(IGR) in dual federal systems. Whereas majoritarian executive-legislativerelations tend to weaken the institutionalization of intergovernmentalarrangements (IGAs), power-sharing executive-legislative relationstend to facilitate it. Two of the mechanisms at work serve toillustrate this point. Given one-party majority cabinets, completegovernment alternations strongly alter actors' interest constellationsover time, thereby increasing the costs of maintaining stablecross-boundary IGR. Moreover, the heavy impact of a potentialelectoral loss induces politicians to shift blame to other governments,thereby undermining cross-boundary cooperation. Majoritariandynamics also weaken integration between IGAs. Furthermore,integration is weakened by compulsory power-sharing structuresunbridged by party ties. In contrast to noncompulsory partycooperation, such internal constitutional divides easily underminethe setup of strong interorganizational linkages.     

States on Steroids: The Intergovernmental Odyssey of American Climate Policy

Climate change has conventionally been framed as an issue that would be addressed by an international regime established through negotiation among nation‐states. The experience of policy development in the decade following the signing of the Kyoto Protocol indicates that climate change also needs to be examined as a challenge of multilevel governance. The increasingly central role of state governments in American climate policy formation squares with recent experience in other Western democracies that share authority across governmental levels. This paper examines the American experience, considering factors that have contributed to a state‐centric policy process and using that body of experience to assess competing strategic choices faced by individual states based on their mix of emission trends and policy adoption rates. In turn, the collective state experience allows for consideration of the varied political feasibility of competing climate policy tools that remain under active review in subnational, national, and international contexts. The paper concludes with a set of scenarios that explore different ways in which a state‐centric system may be integrated with expanding involvement at the national level.     

Intergovernmental Growth Management: A Partnership Framework for State-Local Relations

Growth management receives strong support as a policy concept.However, there are serious political reservations concerningits implementation. The Florida Growth Management Act is anexample of a well constructed policy that relies on a partnershipapproach to state-local relations. Its implementation during1989 has brought to light the difficulties in maintaining thatpartnership, mainly due to disagreements over responsibilityfor funding the infrastructure needed to manage growth. Statewillingness to negotiate revenue sources and responsibilityis essential to strong state-local relations. The complexitiesof financing growth management threaten the viability of strongplanning policy, regardless of its rationality.     

Intergovernmental Relations in Canada: The Emergence of Collaborative Federalism

"Executive federalism" or "federal-provincial diplomacy" haslong been considered the defining characteristic of Canadianfederalism, which combines federalism and Westminster-stylecabinet government. However, these processes have come underincreasing stress in recent years from a number of forces thathave affected the nature and conduct of federalism and intergovernmentalrelations in Canada. Executive federalism has not been displaced,but has been increasingly informed by a set of practices thatwe call "collaborative federalism," characterized more by theprinciple of co-determination of broad national policies ratherthan by the more traditional pattern of federal-leadership.     

The U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations: Unique Artifact of a Bygone Era

The U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR) befitted an era marked by low party polarization, bipartisanship, and cooperative federalism. Although the ACIR’s work was valuable, the growth of federal power, rise of party polarization, and the decline of bipartisanship, along with many other political, governmental, and social changes during its 37‐year life (1959–96), marginalized the ACIR to the point of political vulnerability. These historic changes make it unlikely that the ACIR will be resurrected in a comparable or partial form.     

The Council of Australian Governments and Intergovernmental Relations: A Case of Cooperative Federalism

A series of Special Premiers' Conferences begun in 1990, andthe establishment of the Council of Australian Governments in1992, signaled a phase of "cooperative federalism" in Australia.Joint schemes of policy and legislation and new national intergovernmentalbodies were made by a series of formal agreements. The conditionsand circumstances are appraised in a discussion of the natureof intergovernmental coordination and cooperation, and fromthe critical perspective of a model of competitive federalism.It is concluded that the initiatives, largely, did not representa centralizing process, nor did they override strongly articulatedclaims for diversity. This is made clear following an analysisof the processes occurring in the newly established federalinstitutions and from a series of brief case studies. They expressedthe continuing interdependency and underlying autonomy of stateand Commonwealth governments through schemes that promised tobring agreed, joint benefits through federal solutions.     

The Substitution Approach To Intergovernmental Relations: The Case Of OSHA

Federal legislation of the last two decades has substantiallyreduced state autonomy in dealing with many regulatory issues.Participation in the implementation of these federal programsmay, however, enable states to exert some leverage over policyoutcomes. Variations in state leverage no doubt exist from oneintergovernmental grant program to the next. Substitution authoritymay be one variable accounting for this variation. Under a substitutionapproach, a federal agency cannot only sever the flow of fundsto a grantee; it can also step in and operate a program if statesfail to meet expectations or choose not to participate. Thisarticle generates more basic propositions about the substitutionapproach by analyzing its implementation under the OccupationalSafety and Health Act of 1970. The article examines the roleplayed by substitution authority in motivating the OccupationalSafety and Health Administration (OSHA) to adopt an aggressiveposture toward the states. The article then assesses whetherOSHA's aggressiveness prompted state grantees to exert considerableeffort on behalf of program goals. Finally, the implicationsof current reform proposals, which call for a sorting out offunctions between the states and the federal government, receiveattention.     

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations in 1996: The End of an Era

On 30 September 1996 the U.S. Advisory Commission on IntergovernmentalRelations (ACIR) closed its doors, ending thirty-seven yearsof advocacy for federalism and intergovernmental relations.A majority of members in the Congress felt that A CIR had becomeirrelevant to the issues facing them and agreed that littlewould be lost by terminating the commission. The Clinton administration,although supportive until near the end, withdrew its'supportout of displeasure with the commission's handling of the unfundedfederal mandates issue. The national associations representingstate and local governments were ambivalent. ACIR was no longerlooked to for solutions to the nation's intergovernmental relationsproblems. With the exit of ACIR, the federal government's lastresource for addressing broad intergovernmental issues—beyondthe confines of individual programs—is gone.     

Tribes and States: A New Era in Intergovernmental Affairs

The history of tribal-state conflict and the role of the federalgovernment is nearly two centuries old. In recent years, themost contentious source of conflict between American Indiantribes and states has been Indian gaming. The Congress attemptedto compromise and resolve the issue by passing the Indian GamingRegulatory Act (IGRA) in 1988, but the law has only exacerbatedand opened up new avenues of conflict. The scope and stakesof Indian gaming can be seen in the history of Indian gamingin New Mexico where the defects in IGRA have been readily apparent.As Indian gaming has grown, so have efforts to curtail it andother aspects of tribal sovereignty, including tribal sovereignimmunity. These efforts are currently underway in the Congress.     

Managing Intergovernmental Relations in Australia: The Case of Agricultural Policy Cooperation

In June 2004, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) announced changes to the guidelines and protocols of some 40 ministerial councils and intergovernmental fora which comprise the web of intergovernmental consultative arrangements. This article examines the impact of the guidelines on the operation of the oldest of the sectoral ministerial councils, those relating to agriculture. The COAG guidelines aim to increase the strategic focus of the councils. However, in the case of agricultural policy there appears to have been a centralising of policy control, both within state governments and towards the Commonwealth, which undermines that objective and leaves the ministerial councils focusing on the more technical issues which they are more effective at addressing.     

Institutionalized Evaluation and Intergovernmental Relations: The Case of Coastal Zone Management

The enactment of national environmental management programswas prompted, in large part, by the perceived failure of stateand local government officials to deal adequately with pollutioncontrol and resource management problems. Paradoxically, theimplementation of several important environmental managementprograms relies heavily on these same state and local officials.Congress has sought to resolve this paradox by requiring federalevaluation of state and local environmental planning and managementactivities. Many of these evaluations are little more than routinefiscal audits. However one agency, the Office of Coastal ZoneManagement, has sought to develop a systematic evaluation processfocusing on all aspects of state coastal zone programs. Theseevaluative efforts have led to intergovernmental tensions, mostnotably with regard to the purposes and methods of evaluation,the appropriate roles of federal and state officials, and theresources available for evaluation. In spite of these tensions,there is broad agreement about the value of the evaluation processand its potential applicability in other contexts.     

Two Decades of Change: A Ranking of Key Issues Affecting Intergovernmental Relations

This article describes the results of a 1981 survey of 1,000randomly selected scholars of American government and politicswho were asked to rank the most significant intergovernmentalevents and trends of the past twenty years. Responses were receivedfrom almost 40 percent of these scholars; no significant returnbiases were detected. These scholars ranked civil rights andvoting rights acts as the most significant events of these decades.General Revenue Sharing and the reapportionment cases were rankedsecond and third in importance. The increased flow of federaldollars to states and local governments was ranked the mostimportant trend affecting intergovernmental relations, followedby the increased public disaffection with government and thegrowing dependence of local governments on state and federalaid. The Vietnam War and the inflationary spiral it initiatedwas ranked as the most significant social event affecting thecourse of intergovernmental relations, followed closely by theenergy crisis and the beginnings of the "Great Society." Thearticle also examines the effects of party identification, age,year of degree, government experience, region, and city sizeon scholarly attitudes toward these events and trends. Whilethe overall rankings were not dramatically altered, partisanship,region, and city size all were factors found to be noticeablyrelated to scholarly rankings of these important events andtrends.     

The Transformation of the Central Administration in Spanish Intergovernmental Relations

The role of the central administration in Spain is examinedin relation to the European Union, autonomous communities, andlocal governments. The position of the central administrationhas changed dramatically in light of the transformation of theregime from dictatorship to democracy. Once the dominant actorin the system, it now plays more of a "middleman" or brokerrole within a decentralized state. Fundamental questions ofthe efficacy and legitimacy of the central administration ina federalizing system are also raised.     

Australian Public Policy, Federalism, and Intergovernmental Relations: The Federal Factor

Public policy is the overt activity of governing and what governmentshave as their primary purpose. This is so whether the politicalsystem is unitary or federal. There are many more elements thatcomplicate policymaking in a federal system. In particular,constitutional, financial, and political issues intrude becauseof the necessary interdependence of otherwise independent andautonomous national and subnational components. This articleaddresses this complexity of joint action through use of theideas about federalism, the structure of governing institutions,and the processes of policymaking. The extent to which an outcomedepends on the mixture of independence and interdependence isconceptualized as degrees of the federal factor. Linking thisconcept to particular policy arenas may provide a better understandingof federal systems than explanation from centralization or decentralizationor dependence or independence.     

Reflections of a Member of the U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations

There is consensus on the need for a successor to the U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations in Washington, D.C., but no agreement on how this entity should be organized and funded and what it should do. There are now many players, both organizations and individuals, in the intergovernmental field, and they need to be sorted out. A key distinction is that American federalism is both an idea and an interest, and a new ACIR should focus on the former as a neutral, independent body with informational, convener, educational, and dissemination functions. We should encourage a discussion and debate on what the new ACIR should be and how it should be structured in order to bring federalism and intergovernmental relations back to the table in Washington.