Introduction
Federalism is a system of government that sits uneasily between a 
unitary government with administrative decentralization
      and a confederacy composed of independent states that choose to 
coordinate their activity in some realms, such as defense
      or trade. The comparative study of federations is broad, ranging 
from internal fiscal arrangements to economic performance
      to political representation and identity. Uniting these diverse 
fields is a common interest in federalism as a system of government,
      adopted for a purpose, and failing or meeting aspirations. Federal
 systems vary widely in construction, in purpose, and in
      practice. The system effects are complex and often unexpected. 
Hence, adopting the federal form is an important constitutional
      decision with significant—and sometimes surprising—consequences. 
In this article, we concentrate on two aspects of the literature
      on comparative federalism: the postulated benefits of federalism 
and theories to explain its inconsistent performance.
   
   
   
   
   
General Overviews
As a field, political science has been working on (and arguing about) an understanding of what federalism might achieve and
      under what conditions it might be successful since Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and especially James Madison wrote under
      the pseudonym Publius (
Publius 1787–1788).
 Political scientists and those in closely related disciplines, 
particularly economics and law, continue to search for an
      understanding of optimal constitutional design and the dynamics of
 federal systems in practice. The study of federalism is
      both normative and positive, often within the same work. Positive 
analyses characterize the federal system, make predictions
      about what the system might achieve, formulate hypotheses about 
what causes a federal system to perform well or poorly, and
      measure empirical outcomes (e.g., 
Wheare 1946; 
Riker 1964; 
Filippov, et al. 2004; 
Ostrom 2008; 
Bednar 2009).
 Positive political theory also captures the effect of federalism on 
other political or economic activities, such as the
      production of policy, the extent of citizens’ political 
participation, or the shape of the party system. The study of federalism
      is also normative: as seen in 
Ostrom 2008, 
Elazar 1987, and 
Burgess 2006, the theories characterize the relationship between the people and their government, and the way that federalism builds and
      accommodates diverse values and identities. 
Hueglin and Fenna 2006 and 
Elazar 1987 capture well the philosophy of thought that underpins the concept of federalism. This article focuses primarily on the positive
      literature.
   
   
   
      
      
- 
            
Bednar, Jenna. The Robust Federation: Principles of Design. Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
                A general theory of federalism that is based on the 
incentives that the federal structure creates for the component parts.
               Defiance of constitutional boundaries is to be expected, 
and no single institutional safeguard is sufficient to ensure 
compliance.
               A system of redundant and complementary safeguards is 
necessary for a federation that is robust and adaptive.
 
- 
            
Burgess, Michael. Comparative Federalism: Theory and Practice. New York: Routledge, 2006.
                Burgess’s text treats federalism and federations broadly,
 from intellectual and empirical origins, to close studies of several
               federations in operation, to analysis of federal-system 
failure and success. Rather than accept a single, general theory of
               federalism’s origins, Burgess proposes a theory of 
circumstantial causation of federations that embraces a wide variety of
               internal and external factors. Federations are diverse in
 form, purpose, and practice.
 
- 
            
Elazar, Daniel J. Exploring Federalism. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1987.
                Elazar provides a comprehensive account of the origins of
 federalism and describes different structural forms of federalism;
               this comparative work describes how federalism satisfies 
diverse populations. Elazar emphasizes that the essence of federalism
               is not the formal structure but the relationships between
 the units.
 
- 
            
Filippov, Mikhail, Peter C. Ordeshook, and Olga Shvetsova. Designing Federalism: A Theory of Self-Sustainable Federal Institutions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
                This book links the rise of federally integrated 
political parties to increased opportunities for good policymaking. When
               parties are not integrated across subnational and 
national levels of government, policymaking can be myopic and beholden 
to
               constituency desires. When parties are integrated across 
subnational and national levels, however, politicians are motivated
               partly by party constraints and push for less-myopic 
policymaking.
 
- 
            
Hueglin, Thomas O., and Alan Fenna. Comparative Federalism: A Systematic Inquiry. Peterborough, ON: Broadview, 2006.
                Hueglin and Fenna draw upon differences in constitutional
 traditions and institutional design to identify four main models
               of federalism, as practiced in the United States, Canada,
 Germany, and the European Union. They highlight the importance of
               judicial review in stabilizing and changing the federal 
system.
 
- 
            
Ostrom, Vincent. The Political Theory of a Compound Republic: Designing the American Experiment. 3d ed. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2008.
                Ostrom applies his influential theory of polycentric 
governance—where decision-making authority is dispersed among actors
               and agencies, and democracy emerges from the bottom up—to
 the American federal system. Ostrom presents the federal principle
               of overlapping, polycentric decision points as prior and 
necessary for democracy to thrive.
 
- 
            
Publius. The Federalist Papers. 1787–1788.
                James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay make the case for replacing the early US Articles of Confederation government
               with a federal model. The authors construct the basic intellectual framework of federalism. Accessible online via the US Library of Congress website.
 
- 
            
Riker, William H. Federalism: Origin, Operation, and Significance. Basic Studies in Politics. Boston: Little, Brown, 1964.
                Riker hypothesizes that federalism emerges due to 
military necessity or expansionist drive. He categorizes countries by 
type
               of federal government. The party system and citizen 
loyalty maintain the distribution of authority between levels of 
government.
               Riker concludes with a condemnation of federalism because
 it enables racist political enclaves to persist.
 
- 
            
Wheare, K. C. Federal Government. London: Oxford University Press, 1946.
                A classic study of federalism, updated regularly throughout the 1900s, Wheare describes the “federal principle” of divided
               government, where authority is distributed between two levels of government.
 
 
 
0 comments:
Post a Comment