Federalism and Modernization: Canada and the United States

Since World War II, the federal systems in the United Statesand Canada have moved in opposite directions: the U.S. has becomeincreasingly centralized, while the provinces in Canada havegained power at the expense of Ottawa. These divergences canbe explained by such societal factors as economic structures,international commitments, and locations of minority populations;and by institutional factors, such as the number of constituentunits, methods by which provincial authorities are representedin federal legislatures, and especially by the contrast betweenCanada's Westminster-type institutions and the U.S. separationof powers. These differences are illustrated by intergovernmentalfiscal processes, energy policies, and federal-municipal relations.They cannot be accounted for by modernization theories, butrather by economic structures, demographic distributions, andespecially constitutional and institutional arrangements.     

Institutional self-organization

The rampant acceleration of scientific advance and technological change that seems to be required for national viability unfortunately entails a disconcerting human consequence: an explosive increase in cultural complexity bearing ominous possibilities of massive social disruption. Attainment of an adequate rate of cultural adaptation—as an idealized response to this situation—can be predicated only on the basis of deeper comprehension and creative modification of the social-institutional decisionmaking processes that comprise the cognitivemodus operandi of civilized society. Recent methodological developments in management science are presented as promising theoretical resources for extending the conventional paradigm of objective rational analysis to incorporate valuative aspects of policy-level decision problems. Initially the emphasis is placed on an extension of structured rationality which constitutes one of the core-advances contributing toward emergence of the policy sciences as a legitimate supradiscipline. With its secondary emphasis on the concept institutional self-organization, this paper represents an attempt to (1) capitalize early on a particular feature of optimal organization and (2) bring this feature immediately to bear as a consideration in institutional systems design. The concept of a national administrative research agency is put forward as an institutional prototype embodying the innovative organizational format needed in order to connect theoretical and practical aspects of social problem solving. The significance of this prototype lies in its implication for achievement of a deliberately self-transforming society, a purposefully adaptive version of the social order.This article derives from research conducted with joint support of The Office of Naval Research, Contract No. N00014-70-C-0328, and the RAC Institutional Research Program. The views expressed, however, are those of the author alone. They should not be interpreted as reflecting official views of Research Analysis Corporation or its research sponsors.     

The EU-ACP Economic Partnership Agreements and the 'Development Question': Constraints and Opportunities Posed by Article XXIV and Special and Differential Treatment Provisions of the WTO

This article argues that Article XXIV and special and differentialtreatment (SDT) provisions of the WTO present a number of constraintsand opportunities to the design and scope of the proposed economicpartnership agreements between the European Union (EU) and African,Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. It examines the negotiatingpositions of both sides to argue that were the EU's positionto prevail, ACP and other developing countries would likelysuffer an ‘erosion of the development principles’embedded within the WTO. It is shown that the differences betweenthe two groups over the desirability and/or applicability ofnegotiating free trade agreements between developed and developingcountries under the ‘strict’ jurisdiction of ArticleXXIV, and of negotiating agreements on services and the ‘SingaporeIssues’, amount to a contestation over the principlesof reciprocity and SDT within the WTO, and of the scope of theWTO.