Dynamic De/Centralization in Federations: Comparative Conclusions

This article presents the conclusions of the project Why Centralization and Decentralization in Federations?, which analyzed dynamic de/centralization in Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Switzerland, and the United States over their entire life span. It highlights six main conclusions. First, dyna...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Publius 2019-01, Vol.49 (1), p.194-219
Hauptverfasser: Dardanelli, Paolo, Kincaid, John, Fenna, Alan, Kaiser, André, Lecours, André, Singh, Ajay Kumar, Mueller, Sean, Vogel, Stephan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 219
container_issue 1
container_start_page 194
container_title Publius
container_volume 49
creator Dardanelli, Paolo
Kincaid, John
Fenna, Alan
Kaiser, André
Lecours, André
Singh, Ajay Kumar
Mueller, Sean
Vogel, Stephan
description This article presents the conclusions of the project Why Centralization and Decentralization in Federations?, which analyzed dynamic de/centralization in Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Switzerland, and the United States over their entire life span. It highlights six main conclusions. First, dynamic de/centralization is complex and multidimensional; it cannot be captured by fiscal data alone. Second, while centralization was the dominant trend, Canada is an exception. Third, contrary to some expectations, centralization occurred mainly in the legislative, rather than fiscal, sphere. Fourth, centralization is not only a mid-twentieth century phenomenon; considerable change occurred both before and after. Fifth, variation in centralization across federations appears to be driven by conjunctural causation rather than the net effect of any individual factor. Sixth, institutional properties influence the instruments of dynamic de/centralization but do not significantly affect its direction or magnitude. These findings have important conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and empirical implications for the study of federalism.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/publius/pjy037
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_publius_pjy037</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48586686</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>48586686</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c301t-98f4172eb116747bb3cb7eb5b22e754255abbe332ecc4928a7fba777dac159b13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9j81LwzAYxoMoWKdXb0KPXrq--eqbHqVzKgy86LkkWQopXVuS7lD_eqcdOz088HzwI-SRwppCyfPxaDp_jPnYzsDxiiQUBWZIAa9JAiBUJksJt-QuxhYAeKkwIc-budcHb9ONyyvXT0F3_kdPfuhT36dbt3fh38V7ctPoLrqHs67I9_b1q3rPdp9vH9XLLrMc6JSVqhEUmTOUFqd7Y7g16Iw0jDmUgkmpjXGcM2etKJnS2BiNiHttqSwN5SuyXnZtGGIMrqnH4A86zDWF-o-zPnPWC-ep8LQU2jgN4ZIWSqqiUAX_BVzwUoY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dynamic De/Centralization in Federations: Comparative Conclusions</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Political Science Complete</source><creator>Dardanelli, Paolo ; Kincaid, John ; Fenna, Alan ; Kaiser, André ; Lecours, André ; Singh, Ajay Kumar ; Mueller, Sean ; Vogel, Stephan</creator><creatorcontrib>Dardanelli, Paolo ; Kincaid, John ; Fenna, Alan ; Kaiser, André ; Lecours, André ; Singh, Ajay Kumar ; Mueller, Sean ; Vogel, Stephan</creatorcontrib><description>This article presents the conclusions of the project Why Centralization and Decentralization in Federations?, which analyzed dynamic de/centralization in Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Switzerland, and the United States over their entire life span. It highlights six main conclusions. First, dynamic de/centralization is complex and multidimensional; it cannot be captured by fiscal data alone. Second, while centralization was the dominant trend, Canada is an exception. Third, contrary to some expectations, centralization occurred mainly in the legislative, rather than fiscal, sphere. Fourth, centralization is not only a mid-twentieth century phenomenon; considerable change occurred both before and after. Fifth, variation in centralization across federations appears to be driven by conjunctural causation rather than the net effect of any individual factor. Sixth, institutional properties influence the instruments of dynamic de/centralization but do not significantly affect its direction or magnitude. These findings have important conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and empirical implications for the study of federalism.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0048-5950</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1747-7107</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/publius/pjy037</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Publius, 2019-01, Vol.49 (1), p.194-219</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c301t-98f4172eb116747bb3cb7eb5b22e754255abbe332ecc4928a7fba777dac159b13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c301t-98f4172eb116747bb3cb7eb5b22e754255abbe332ecc4928a7fba777dac159b13</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5580-7093 ; 0000-0003-1986-1604</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dardanelli, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kincaid, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fenna, Alan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaiser, André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lecours, André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Ajay Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mueller, Sean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vogel, Stephan</creatorcontrib><title>Dynamic De/Centralization in Federations: Comparative Conclusions</title><title>Publius</title><description>This article presents the conclusions of the project Why Centralization and Decentralization in Federations?, which analyzed dynamic de/centralization in Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Switzerland, and the United States over their entire life span. It highlights six main conclusions. First, dynamic de/centralization is complex and multidimensional; it cannot be captured by fiscal data alone. Second, while centralization was the dominant trend, Canada is an exception. Third, contrary to some expectations, centralization occurred mainly in the legislative, rather than fiscal, sphere. Fourth, centralization is not only a mid-twentieth century phenomenon; considerable change occurred both before and after. Fifth, variation in centralization across federations appears to be driven by conjunctural causation rather than the net effect of any individual factor. Sixth, institutional properties influence the instruments of dynamic de/centralization but do not significantly affect its direction or magnitude. These findings have important conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and empirical implications for the study of federalism.</description><issn>0048-5950</issn><issn>1747-7107</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9j81LwzAYxoMoWKdXb0KPXrq--eqbHqVzKgy86LkkWQopXVuS7lD_eqcdOz088HzwI-SRwppCyfPxaDp_jPnYzsDxiiQUBWZIAa9JAiBUJksJt-QuxhYAeKkwIc-budcHb9ONyyvXT0F3_kdPfuhT36dbt3fh38V7ctPoLrqHs67I9_b1q3rPdp9vH9XLLrMc6JSVqhEUmTOUFqd7Y7g16Iw0jDmUgkmpjXGcM2etKJnS2BiNiHttqSwN5SuyXnZtGGIMrqnH4A86zDWF-o-zPnPWC-ep8LQU2jgN4ZIWSqqiUAX_BVzwUoY</recordid><startdate>20190101</startdate><enddate>20190101</enddate><creator>Dardanelli, Paolo</creator><creator>Kincaid, John</creator><creator>Fenna, Alan</creator><creator>Kaiser, André</creator><creator>Lecours, André</creator><creator>Singh, Ajay Kumar</creator><creator>Mueller, Sean</creator><creator>Vogel, Stephan</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5580-7093</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1986-1604</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190101</creationdate><title>Dynamic De/Centralization in Federations</title><author>Dardanelli, Paolo ; Kincaid, John ; Fenna, Alan ; Kaiser, André ; Lecours, André ; Singh, Ajay Kumar ; Mueller, Sean ; Vogel, Stephan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c301t-98f4172eb116747bb3cb7eb5b22e754255abbe332ecc4928a7fba777dac159b13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dardanelli, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kincaid, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fenna, Alan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaiser, André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lecours, André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Ajay Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mueller, Sean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vogel, Stephan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Publius</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dardanelli, Paolo</au><au>Kincaid, John</au><au>Fenna, Alan</au><au>Kaiser, André</au><au>Lecours, André</au><au>Singh, Ajay Kumar</au><au>Mueller, Sean</au><au>Vogel, Stephan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dynamic De/Centralization in Federations: Comparative Conclusions</atitle><jtitle>Publius</jtitle><date>2019-01-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>194</spage><epage>219</epage><pages>194-219</pages><issn>0048-5950</issn><eissn>1747-7107</eissn><abstract>This article presents the conclusions of the project Why Centralization and Decentralization in Federations?, which analyzed dynamic de/centralization in Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Switzerland, and the United States over their entire life span. It highlights six main conclusions. First, dynamic de/centralization is complex and multidimensional; it cannot be captured by fiscal data alone. Second, while centralization was the dominant trend, Canada is an exception. Third, contrary to some expectations, centralization occurred mainly in the legislative, rather than fiscal, sphere. Fourth, centralization is not only a mid-twentieth century phenomenon; considerable change occurred both before and after. Fifth, variation in centralization across federations appears to be driven by conjunctural causation rather than the net effect of any individual factor. Sixth, institutional properties influence the instruments of dynamic de/centralization but do not significantly affect its direction or magnitude. These findings have important conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and empirical implications for the study of federalism.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/publius/pjy037</doi><tpages>26</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5580-7093</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1986-1604</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0048-5950
ispartof Publius, 2019-01, Vol.49 (1), p.194-219
issn 0048-5950
1747-7107
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_publius_pjy037
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Political Science Complete
title Dynamic De/Centralization in Federations: Comparative Conclusions
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T03%3A03%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dynamic%20De/Centralization%20in%20Federations:%20Comparative%20Conclusions&rft.jtitle=Publius&rft.au=Dardanelli,%20Paolo&rft.date=2019-01-01&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=194&rft.epage=219&rft.pages=194-219&rft.issn=0048-5950&rft.eissn=1747-7107&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/publius/pjy037&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E48586686%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=48586686&rfr_iscdi=true