Preview

GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY

Advanced search

NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS OF MUNICIPALITIES IN EUROPE – DIFFERENT MODELS OF INSTITUTIONALIZED POLITICAL COOPERATION

https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2018-11-4-39-55

Full Text:

Abstract

The article endeavours to identify and characterise selected national associations of municipalities across Europe, as well as to provide typical models of municipalities being associated into large groups representing their interests in relations with central government. A study that addressed 26 European countries has helped identify four principal organisational models of associations of local structures. These are as follows: (1) the consolidated model (existing in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden), (2) the bipolar model (in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Estonia, Italy, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Switzerland), (3) the federative model (in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Spain), and (4) the fragmented model (to be found in France, United Kingdom, Poland, Hungary, and Romania).

About the Author

Bartłomiej Kołsut
Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management, Adam Mickiewicz University
Poland
Poznań


References

1. Agranoff R. (2014). Relations Between Local and National Governments. In: D. P. HaiderMarkel, ed., The Oxford Handbook of State and Local Government. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199579679.013.002

2. Bel G. and Fageda X. (2006). Between privatization and intermunicipal cooperation: Small municipalities, scale economies and transaction costs. Urban Public Economics Review 6, pp. 13-31.

3. Bel G., Fageda X. and Mur M. (2013). Why Do Municipalities Cooperate to Provide Local Public Services? An Empirical Analysis. Local Government Studies, 39(3), pp. 435-454.

4. Bel G. and Warner M. (2015). Inter-municipal cooperation and costs: Expectations and evidence. Public Administration, 93(1), pp. 52-67.

5. Blom-Hansen J. (1999). Policy-Making in Central-Local Government Relations: Balancing Local Autonomy, Macroeconomic Control, and Sectoral Policy Goals. Journal of Public Policy, 19(3), pp. 237-264.

6. CCRE (2007). Consultation procedures within European states. Brussels, Conseil des Communes et Régions d’Europe. [online] Council of European Municipalities and Regions. Available at: http://www.ccre.org/img/uploads/piecesjointe/filename/procedure_consultation_en.pdf [Accessed 17 Jul. 2018].

7. Chenier J. A. (2009). The evolving role of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Canadian Public Administration, 52(3), pp. 395–416.

8. Cigler B. A. (1994). The County-State Connection: A National Study of Associations of Counties. Public Administration Review, 54(I), pp. 3-11.

9. Entwistle T. and Laffin M. (2003). The multiple strategies of the Local Government Association: partner, player and think-tank? Policy & Politics, 31(1), pp. 37–50.

10. Feiock R. (2007). Rational Choice and Regional Governance. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(1), pp. 47-63.

11. Grešová L. (2016). Towards the implementation of the best practice from abroad – strengthening the cooperation among Slovak municipalities. Acta Regionalia et Environmentalica, 2, pp. 35-40.

12. Heinelt H. and Kuebler D. (2005). Metropolitan governance, democracy and the dynamics of place. In: H. Heinelt and D. Kübler, eds., Metropolitan Governance. Capacity, democracy and the dynamics of place. Oxon, Routledge, pp. 8–28.

13. Hulst R. and van Montfort A. (2007). Inter-Municipal Cooperation: A Widespread Phenomenon. In: Hulst R., van Montfort A., eds., Inter-Municipal Cooperation in Europe. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 1-21.

14. Ivanović M., Podolnjak R., Gluhak I. and Jackson J. (2010). Inter-Municipal Cooperation in the Republic of Croatia. Zagreb, Association of Municipalities in the Republic of Croatia. [online] Udruga Opcina. Available at: http://udruga-opcina.hr/upload_data/site_files/imcincroatia_66826308.pdf [Accessed 17 Jul. 2018].

15. Kettunen P. and Kull M. (2009). Governing Europe: the Status and Networking Strategies of Finnish, Estonian and German Subnational Offices in Brussels. Regional and Federal Studies, 19(1), pp. 117–142.

16. Kaczmarek T. and Mikuła Ł. (2007). Ustroje terytorialno-administracyjne obszarów metropolitalnych w Europie. Poznań, Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

17. Kołsut B. (2015). Zinstytucjonalizowane sieci współdziałania międzygminnego w Polsce. Poznań, Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

18. Krukowska J. and Lackowska M. (2017). Metropolitan Colours of Europeanization. Institutionalization of Integrated Territorial Investment Structures in the Context of Past Cooperation in Metropolitan Regions. Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 75(3), pp. 275-289.

19. Lackowska M. (2009). Zarządzanie obszarami metropolitalnymi w Polsce. Między dobrowolnością a imperatywem. Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

20. Mäeltsemees S., Lõhmus M. and Ratas J. (2013). Inter-Municipal Cooperation: Possibility for Advancing Local Democracy and Subsidiarity in Estonia. Halduskultuur – Administrative Culture, 14(1), pp. 73-97.

21. Mikuła Ł. (2014). Powiązania instytucjonalne Poznania – współpraca samorządowa. In. T. Kaczmarek, ed., Delimitacja poznańskiego obszaru metropolitalnego. Biblioteka Aglomeracji Poznańskiej, 26, pp. 79-93.

22. Nownes A. J. (2014). Local and State Interest Group Organizations. In: D. P. HaiderMarkel, ed., The Oxford Handbook of State and Local Government. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199579679.013.006.

23. Olson M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University Press.

24. Ostrom V., Tiebout C. and Warren R. (1961). The organization of government in metropolitan areas. American Political Science Review, 55, pp. 835-842.

25. Rayle L. and Zegras C. (2012). The Emergence of Inter-Municipal Collaboration: Evidence from Metropolitan Planning in Portugal. European Planning Studies 21(6), pp. 867-889.

26. Schot A. K. (2015). Municipal Associations, Membership Composition, and Interest Representation in Local Provincial Relations. Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. Paper 3333.

27. Sørensen R.J. (2007). Does dispersed public ownership impair efficiency? The case of refuse collection in Norway. Public Administration, 85(4), pp. 1045-1058.

28. Stoney K. and Graham K. A. H. (2009). Federal-municipal relations in Canada: The changing organizational landscape. Canadian Public Administration, 52(3), pp. 371–394.

29. Warner M. E. (2006). Inter-municipal cooperation in the U.S.: a regional governance solution? Urban Public Economics Review ,7, pp. 132–151.

30. Wollmann H. (2010). Comparing Two Logics of Interlocal Cooperation: The Cases of France and Germany. Urban Affairs Review, 46(2), pp. 263-292.


For citation:


Kołsut B. NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS OF MUNICIPALITIES IN EUROPE – DIFFERENT MODELS OF INSTITUTIONALIZED POLITICAL COOPERATION. GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY. 2018;11(4):39-55. https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2018-11-4-39-55

Views: 200


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2071-9388 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1565 (Online)