Prof. Andreas Ladner pmp 2011 Gestion de l’organisation territoriale Tasks and Functions.

Prof. Andreas Ladner

pmp 2011

Gestion de l’organisation territoriale

Tasks and Functions

| ©IDHEAP - [email protected] | | 18/04/23 |

Why do we have/need a state?


State in history

The feudalistic state (empires, monarchies)

The oligarchic state (aristocracies, bourgeoisies)

The liberal constitutional state

The national state

The democratic welfare state

(States without territory and boundaries)


Main tasks of a state - a general view

Guaranteeing security and social order (external and internal

security)

Guaranteeing provisions and services which are essential to

modern life and for which an universal provision has to be

guaranteed

Providing infrastructure and regulations for economic prosperity

Guaranteeing social security and welfare

Guaranteeing sustainable development and protection against

risks


A state provides public services

1. What are the specific public services a state has to

provide?

2. How does the state have to provide these services?


How do you define what a modern state has to do?


In modern, developed countries the term public services often includes:

Broadcasting

Education

Electricity

Environmental protection

Fire service

Gas

Health care

Military

Police service

Public information and archiving,

such as libraries

Public transportation

Social housing

Social services

Telecommunications

Town planning

Waste management

Water services


How do you define how a state has to provide its services?

Goods (services) which may (according to prevailing social

norms) be under-provided by the market.

Or: By democratic political decisions tout court!

.


Mancure Olson (1986): Toward a More General Theory of Governmental Structure

A theory of governmental structure begins with market

failure

Market failure stems from nonrivalness in consumption

and infeasability of excluding nonpurchasers -> Public

goods


Public goods have different patterns of benificiaries

Exogenous domains (receivers of a public good are

beyond the control of the political and legal system)

Endogenous domains (receivers of a public good are

within the political and legel system)

Some public goods have a clientele that is not defined

geographically.


See article 1969:

Parteo optimal allocation has to follow the principle of

fiscal equivalence

http://www.andreasladner.ch/dokumente/Literatur_Unterric

ht/Olson_1969.pdf


„Gewährleistungsstaat?“

Services provided by the state itself

Services for which the responsibility for the provision is in

the hand of the state

Leading principle(s)?


B: Allocation of tasks and services

Which state level which services?

Decision, funding and execution

(Social security, health, education, …… )


Which level which services?

Allocation of services between different levels

Decision, funding and execution

Relationship between the different levels

-> IGM


Dimensions to analyse (Page and Goldsmith 1987)

Tasks

Discretion

Access and Influence


Results 1987

Northern European Countries (Norway, Denmark, Sweden, UK): Local

governments have a wide range of functions, with some discretion in the

way these functions are performed. Access to central government

passes largely through their local government associations.

Southern European Countries (France, Spain, Italy): Local governments

are small with few functions, limited discretion (oversight through central

government) and limited finances. More direct and informal access to

central government for many matters of interest.


Since then, things have probably changed

EU

NPM

Local Democracy

Governance


How to measure the role of local government?

Task and functions: share of public expenditure, share of public

employment

Discretion: Regulations and the legal system, oversight, (financial

autonomy), self-rule or shared rule

Access: importance of associations, role of parties, „cumul des

mandats“


Hypotheses

Recent developments had very little impact on IGR (path

dependency)

Extensive changes

Varying degrees of change depending on the experience

of each country


Observation

Growing importance of the meso (UK, Belgium, Spain,

France, Italy Norway, Sweden).


La Suisse – Sonderfall?


Taux d’administration selon la forme juridique

| Diapositive 25 |

| ©IDHEAP - [email protected] | | 18/04/23 | | Diapositive 26 |

Impact culturel 2005

G3 Personnel de la fonction publique selon la culture dominante 2005, en %

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Germanophones Francophones Italophones Total

Source: OFS, RFE 2005, calculs propres BADAC

Corporations dedroit public

Communes

Canton

Confédération


Results from the country conclusion of the chapters in Goldsmith/Page (1)

Institutions of territorial governance have changed (due to

globalization, Europeanisation, the emergence of the meso

and changing patterns of regulation) considerably

-> nature of IGR are likely to have changed also.

-> a greater diversity in terms of IGR is to be found


Results from the country conclusion of the chapters in Goldsmith/Page (2)

North-south distinction is no longer valid

Some countries which were at the top in 1987 have moved

down (N), some have moved up (F, I) (p. 248)


Discretion

Supervisional power of national government has declined

in F and I

E: Whitehall has become more important, supervision,

audit

DK, N, S: tightening of the existing framework of

supervision


Trends

Finishing unfinished business in the South

Greater regulations and new forms of it

Beyond North and South

Prof. Andreas Ladner pmp 2011 Gestion de l’organisation territoriale Tasks and Functions.

Documents

Transcript of Prof. Andreas Ladner pmp 2011 Gestion de l’organisation territoriale Tasks and Functions.