Institutional linkages and policy networks in the federal system of West Germany (original) (raw)
Related papers
German Federalism: On the Way to a " Cooperative Centralism "
Germany has a long tradition of federalism extending far back in history (Ziblatt 2004; Broschek 2011). This tradition has always been characterized by a discrepancy between the attitudes of the public to its federalism and the reform ideas of the (political) elites. While the public has a strong desire for an equality of living conditions, solidarity, social cohesion, and cooperation between the orders of government, academic discourse is shaped by calls for wide-ranging federalism reforms, which are oriented toward the American model of " dual federalism. " Against this background, this chapter contrasts public attitudes on key aspects of the federal system with long-lasting academic recommendations for reform. Light will be shed on the general perception of the federal system as a whole, the division of powers, and in particular the issue of joint decision-making (Politikverflechtung) between the orders of government—all issues that have been repeatedly interrogated in various surveys. A further aspect of these polls is the question of the extent to which solidarity or competition shall be realized between the federal and Land governments—a question that is highly controversial in politics and academia (especially in the fiscal equalization debate), though public perceptions are quite different. The German public prefers a pragmatic and cooperative approach instead of normative concepts when it comes to solving major political challenges faced by the Länder and the Federal Republic.
From state of authority to network state: the German state in comparative perspective
Michio Muramatsu/Frieder Naschold (Hrsg.), State and administration in Japan and Germany: a comparative perspective on continuity and change, 39-62., 1997
"In a monograph on Japanese industrial policy Japan was characterized as a "networkstate", in the sense that it is "able to exercise power only in terms of its network of ties with the private sector" (Okimoto 1989, 226). It is tempting to take up this metaphor in the comparative perspective of this volume. As I intend to demonstrate, the modern German state can be called a network state in a double sense: Not only is it linked to the private sector--or, as Hegel would have put it, to "civil society"--in a network-like fashion. Moreover, a constant feature of its internal institutional make-up is its networklike character. Policy formation in the Federal Republic of Germany is very often the product of complex processes of mutual accommodation between corporate actors none of which has the power to unilaterally impose his objectives. 1"
Arraying institutional layers in federalism reforms: lessons from the German case
Regional & Federal Studies, 2016
The introductory article to this Special Issue offers an analytical framework for investigating federal reforms. By looking through the lens of institutional theory, it provides an avenue for grasping the basic mechanisms which are at work in reform processes. It is argued that the German case which comprises three distinct reform steps stretching out over more than one decade represents an especially suitable example for understanding the general logics of federal reform. As a "prototype• of sequential, asynchronous reforms, it allows for generating theoretical insights beyond the findings of a single case study. The article reveals that layering, sequencing, and the linkage of different arenas are the most relevant aspects to be considered when examining federal reforms. Finally, it is established how the contributions to this Special Issue refer to the analytical categories worked out in this introduction.
German Federalism and Recent Reform Efforts
German Law Journal
In both the United States and Germany constitutional lawyers, politicians, and the attentive public speak of “dual federalism.” In the United States this means that the federal government and the states have separate political and administrative responsibilities and their own sources of revenues. In Germany, in contrast, dual federalism means that the federal government, i.e., the executive and legislative branches, are responsible for most legislation, and that the Länder (states; singular, Land) generally administer the laws (in large part through their local governments) on their own responsibility. In both federal systems “dual federalism” has been undermined if not replaced by “cooperative federalism,” generally associated with the New Deal era in the United States and the Finance Reform of 1969 in Germany. In the meantime “intergovernmental relations” has more or less replaced the concept of “cooperative federalism” in the United States, while Politikverflechtung (political/po...
Policy networks and European governance The Europeanisation of regional policy-making in Germany
1998
This paper tries to complement insights of the policy network literature ('Rhodes model'). It argues that drawing on 'New Institutionalism' can enhance the model's capacity to explain network change. Empirical evidence drawn from East Germany's integration into the European Structural Funds, highlights the importance of network structure and the potential it offers for strategic alliances among key network participants. It supports the claim that institutions such as policy networks can create dynamics which governments find difficult to control. The paper also shows that despite the high degree of domestic institutionalisation that characterises the German federal system, the Structural Funds have been influential in changing both the process and the content of German domestic policy arrangements. Policy networks have been important catalysts for the 'Europeanisation' of domestic policies and the transformation of European governance more generally.
In recent political controversies, the federal structure of Germany was increasingly regarded as a serious institutional obstacle to political reform, in particular of the welfare state. Most political actors agreed that the complex structures of the federal system should somehow be disentangled. But consensus was restricted to a rather narrow set of institutional choices. As I will point pout, the limits of this set of choices were defined by path dependence. As I will show, this path was one of several possible solutions for an institutional dilemma resulting from the discrepancies in timing between two phases of the German state-building process, namely, the formation of the modern bureaucratic state on the one hand, the formation of a German nation-state. Around the mid 19th century, there were two rival discourses for solving this dilemma, “federative nationalism” on the one hand, “federal unitarism” on the other. The establishment of the intellectual hegemony of the unitarist discourse resulted in a “critical juncture“ which determined the further path of institutional development.
Regional & Federal Studies, 2016
This article explains the zigzag of the stepwise federalism reform in Germany by accessing the theoretical concept of institutional incongruity. It is argued that the existing imbalance between competencies, policy problems and fiscal resources was further exacerbated as actors adopted inconsistent institutional 'layers' during the sequential reform. Two case studies on higher education and unemployment policy reveal that actors finally reverted to joint decisionmaking and revived ideas of solidarity in order to remedy inconsistent reform results, although 'disentanglement' and competition had been the leitmotivs underlying the first reform step. The article confirms that institutional congruity is hardly attainable in federations. Reform attempts aiming at disentangling responsibilities and fiscal resources encounter insuperable difficulties, because policy issues more than ever transcend the borders of single territorial units and need joint financing. The study concludes by discussing the question whether joint decision-making-compared to dual resp. 'layer-cake' federalism-owns a specific democratic quality. KEYWORDS Joint decision making; federalism refonn; unempl<7fment policy; higher education; Germany We modernize the federal system, which in itself contains the imperative to cooperate .... we realize that we now enter a period in which we need more cooperation ...