Lawrence E. Rose

Municipal Size and Local Nonelectoral Participation: Findings from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway

This paper undertakes an analysis of five forms of local nonelectoral participation in three European countries. The primary question of interest is whether or not there is any systematic relationship between these forms of nonelectoral participation and the size of local political – administrative units. It is argued that, to the extent it is reasonable to expect size to be relevant, the nature of the relationships is likely to vary from one form of participation to another. Analyses are based on survey data collected during the 1990s in each country by means of logistic regression with a common set of variables. Although the findings vary somewhat from one country to another, and are not always in keeping with theoretical expectations, they nonetheless indicate that size does indeed appear to make some difference, even after controlling for the effects of individual characteristics. The effect of size, in other words, is not merely a byproduct of the compositional characteristics of the individuals living in different sized municipalities, as is sometimes suggested.

Size and local democracy

How large should local governments be, and what are the implications of changing the scale of local governments for the quality of local democracy? These questions have stood at the centre of debates among scholars and public sector reformers alike from antiquity to the present. This monograph offers the first systematic cross-national investigation of these questions using empirical evidence gathered specifically for this purpose. Results provide insights that offer important touchstones for reform activities and academic research efforts in many countries

PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL POLITICS IN NORWAY: Some Do, Some Don't; Some Will, Some Won't

Using data from two national surveys conducted in 1990 and 1993, this article investigates seven modes of sociopolitical behavior and one form of potential political participation in the context of Norwegian local government. Results indicate that factors associated with alternative modes of activity vary; different types of people tend to choose different channels of involvement. The most pronounced difference is found between activities directed toward influencing public opinion and those intended to influence political decision making more directly. Whereas the former mode is more typically chosen by younger, well-educated single women living in urban areas, the latter is more characteristic of married, better educated men living in smaller municipalities. Findings are characterized by a high degree of stability over the period considered. Only in the case of voting is there a suggestion of some possible change. After decades in which socioeconomic status variables have been of little significance for voting in Norway (a situation explained by the mobilizing effects of organizations), an effect of education was found in the 1993 survey. Also noteworthy is the distribution of participation among the population: rather than being cumulative, different forms of political involvement are relatively widespread.

Territorial Choice: Rescaling Governance in European States

Reformers of public administration are on a perennial quest for a better fit between the scale of problems confronted by governments and the scale of governmental institutions that are responsible for solving those problems. Such a fit, however, can never be a permanent one; societies change and so do the extent and nature of challenges confronting governments. Institutions, moreover, have an inbuilt inertia that often confounds reformers and leads to intractable solutions — or to surprising innovations and variations in the way problems are confronted. Nowhere are these parallel trends more visible than in the field of local and regional governance, where daring experiments often coexist with long-standing deadlocks and antiquated institutional patterns.

Does Location Matter? Public Acceptance of Restrictive Policy Measures at the Local Level

Abstract This article explores the significance of local contexts as a factor relevant for understanding public acceptance of restrictive policy measures intended to reduce environmental problems associated with the use of private cars. The article presents a comparative case study based on two Norwegian municipalities drawing on both qualitative and quantitative materials. Findings from the quantitative analysis show that the local context matters for public acceptance of our selection of restrictive policy measures even after controlling for individual socio-demographic characteristics and attitudes which have been documented to be of importance in earlier studies. Three considerations which, on the basis of qualitative materials, appear to be important for understanding the local context are strategies for municipal development, local identity and crisis understanding. These findings point to the fact that there may be a lack of transferability between general findings in the literature on public acceptance for restrictive policy measures and what is feasible and indeed recommendable at the local level.

A Comparative Analysis of Territorial Choice in Europe — Conclusions

Choices about sub-national organization are inherently controversial. Such choices are about power-sharing in carving up a territory into smaller jurisdictions. Territorial choice may involve large choices, such as drawing up a federal constitution, or small ones such as minor adjustment of borders between two municipalities. Territorial choice may come in neat packages, such as a choice between amalgamating two or more municipalities into a consolidated unit or leaving things as they are. Sometimes choices are based on well-researched recommendations with easily grasped consequences. More often territorial choices are fuzzy affairs with numerous battlefronts and bewildering claims of benefits and pitfalls associated with the various options. Is a unitary urban authority better for a large conurbation than retaining a number of smaller jurisdictions? Better for whom, or for what purposes or functions? Perhaps a two-tier system is better for such an area, with a functional division between a larger unit and a series of smaller units? A choice between small or large local authorities may also hinge on a redistribution of functional responsibilities between state and local government: small units may mean less devolution, large units more devolution. And then there is the related issue of finances: how are jurisdictions to be delineated so that local authorities are financially viable? Territorial choice also impacts on political chances and careers. One way of carving up the territory may ensure the permanence of left-wing strongholds, another way of cutting the pie may yield right-wing bastions. The binding force of international treaties, from the EU to the WTO, adds further complications to territorial choice. State sovereignty is increasingly constrained, with concomitant constraints on power-sharing. No wonder these choices are controversial.

The Staying Power of the Norwegian Periphery

Local government in Norway is somewhat unique. Rather than being mentioned in the constitution and thereby being formally recognized as an integral part of the political system, local government is the subject of special legislation. The first such laws were adopted as early as 1837. Under this legislation a two-tier system of local government was established. On one level a system of municipalities was created, at a second level county councils were established. The passage of these initial laws was largely the result of efforts by local groups — primarily farmers and businessmen — who sought greater freedom from the central bureaucracy and additional rights to make decisions on matters affecting the local community according to local prerogatives. As such, a centre-periphery cleavage was apparent even at this early stage in the evolution of Norwegian democratic politics. This cleavage has proven to be an enduring feature as will become apparent in two stories regarding recent attempts at reforming territorial governance in Norway.

Reforming Local Governments in Times of Crisis: Values and Expectations of Good Local Governance in Comparative Perspective

A lot has been written about normative and theoretical expectations of local government. In this chapter we give the word to the citizens. How satisfied are they with the way local democracy works in their municipality and what do they expect from their municipalities in terms of facilities and services? With the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, and Switzerland, our study covers four relatively well-off countries holding top positions in most overall assessments of democracy. We start with a general evaluation of the citizens’ satisfaction with their life in their municipality. In a next step we address the different ideas citizens have about the very essence of local democracy and local governance. The chapter ends with a discussion of varying degrees of satisfaction considering the different expectations.

Norway: No Big Deal with Regional Elections?

County elections in Norway have been the subject of benign neglect. A search in the national library database using the word fylkesvalg (’county election’) turns up no references to academic literature. When the search is broadened using the WorldCat, the result is the same: no results other than a book on Norwegian electoral law are found. Like-wise, if Google Scholar is used, the results are not much better: only six references are found and none of them focuses directly on county elections. A search using the English-language terms proves a bit more successful, but most of the works characteristically deal with county elections in a summary fashion, comparing the partisan division of the vote for county elections aggregated to the national level with similar figures for outcomes in national parliamentary and/or municipal council elections (see e.g. Bjorklund, 1988; Heidar, 1989; Thomsen, 1998).

Willing to stand … if asked: candidacy for local council elections in the Netherlands and Norway

The availability of people willing to stand for elected political office constitutes a critical node in the study of democratic political systems. On the one hand standing for election is a form of political participation where, just as with all other forms of political activity, the question of who does and who doesn’t – or who will and who won’t – is an important issue in its own right.