In this article the interaction and cooperation of local level actors is conceived as being premised on two organizational logics, that is, on the territorialitybased general purpose elected local government form and on institutionalized functionality-based single-purpose non-elected intermunicipal cooperation. Drawing on the work by Hooghe and Marks the two variants are identified as “type I” and “type II” institutional arrangements. Germany and France are treated as comparative cases in point.In Germany the institutional development resulted, with federalism-typical variance between the Länder, in a mono structure of type I local government in some and in a dual structure with type II intermunicipal bodies in others, whereas in France the dual structure with a multitude of type II intermuncipal bodies (intercommunalité) has prevailed. Recently a new wave of territorial reforms in East German Länder has extended the coverage of type I local government and reduced that of type II intermunicipal bodies, while in France the introduction of the type II communautés bears traces of the type I local government form. In both countries these reform moves have been triggered largely by mounting criticism of the operational (conflict and transaction) costs and democratic deficits of the dual structure with type II intermuncipal bodies. These advances of the type I local government form concur with local level territorial reforms put into effect in a growing number of other European countries. Finally the article interprets the findings by drawing on and applying the conceptual government/governance scheme.
Bolgherini, S.2010. Local government and inter-municipal cooperation in Italy and Germany. PIFO Occasional Paper No. 12. Giessen, Germany: Univ. of Giessen.
2.
Borraz, O., and P. LeGalès .2005. France: The intermunicipal revolution. In Comparing local governance: Trends and developments , edited by B. Denters and L. E. Rose, 12-28. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
Büchner, C., and J. Franzke.2002. Das Land Brandenburg. Potsdam, Germany: Kommunalwissenschaftliches Institut .
4.
Comité Balladur, Comité pour la Réforme des Collectivités Locales.2009. Il est temps de décider, Rapport au Président de la République. Paris : La Documentation Française.
5.
Dexia.2008. Sub-national governments in the European Union. Paris: Dexia Editions.
6.
DiMaggio, P., and W. Powell.1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review38:147-60.
7.
Feiock, R.2010. In Press. Self-organizing regions: Policy networks and institutional collective action. Urban Affairs Review,
8.
Frey, B., and R. Eichenberger .1999. The new democratic federalism for Europe. Functional, overlapping and competing jurisdictions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
9.
Friend, J.1977. Community and policy: Coordination from above or from below. Linkage7:4-10.
10.
Grossi, G., G. Marcou, and C. Reichard. Forthcoming. Comparative aspects of institutional variants for local public service provision. In Provision of public services in Europe. Between state, local government and market, edited by H. Wollmann and G. Marcou. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
11.
Hlepas, N.2010. Uncompleted Greek territorial consolidation: Two waves of reforms. In Territorial consolidation reforms in Europe , edited by P. Swianiewicz, 45-73. Budapest : OSI.
12.
Hoffmann, U.2002. Zur Gemeindegebietsreform in Brandenburg. In Kommunalstrukturen in den neuen Bundesländern nach 10 Jahren Deutscher Einheit, edited by Michael Nierhaus, 19-30. Potsdam , Germany: KWI.
13.
Hoffmann-Martinot, V.2003. The French Republic-One yet divisible? In Local government reform in Europe, edited by N. Kersting and A. Vetter, 157-83. Wiesbaden , Germany: VS Verlag.
14.
Hooghe, L., and G. Marks.2001. Types of multi-level governance. European Integration Online Papers5. http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2001-011a.htm.
15.
Hooghe, L., and G. Marks.2003. Unravelling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review97:233-43.
16.
Huron, D., and J. Spindler.1998. Le management public local. Paris: Montchrestien.
17.
Jegouzo, Y.1993. Communes rurales, décentralisation et intercommunalité . In La décentralisation dix ans après, edited by G. Gilbert and A. Delcamp, 183-93. Paris: CNRS.
18.
Kaufmann, F. X., G. Majone , and V. Ostrom, eds. 1987. Guidance, control and evaluation in the public sector . Berlin: de Gruyter.
19.
Kuhlmann, S., and P. Fedele. Forthcoming. New public management in continental Europe: Local government modernization in Germany, France and Italy from a comparative perspective. In Provision of public services in Europe. Between state, local government and market, edited by H. Wollmann and G. Marcou.Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
20.
Lackowska, M.2009. Why is voluntary co-operation condemned to failure? Reflections on the Polish and German background. Lex Localis7:347-69.
21.
Marcou, G.2000. La réforme de l’intercommunalité. In Annuaire 2000 des Collectivités Locales, edited by G. Marcou, 3-10. Paris: CNRS.
22.
Marcou, G.2006. La gouvernance: Innovation conceptuelle ou artifice de présentation. In Annuaire 2006 des Collectivités Locales, edited by G. Marcou and H. Wollmann, 5-18. Paris: CNRS.
23.
Marcou, G.2010a. La réforme territoriale: Ambition et défaut de perspective. Révue française du droit administratif 2: à paraître.
24.
Marcou, G.2010b. La réforme territoriale. Analyse du nouveau projet de réforme des collectivités territoriales. In Quelle nouvelle réforme pour les collectivités territoriales françaises? edited by J.-C. Némery , 21-80. Paris: L’Hammatan.
25.
Mayntz, R.2003. New challenges to governance theory. In Governance as social and political communication, edited by H. P. Bang, 25-35. Manchester, UK: Manchester Univ. Press.
26.
Mier, C.2003. Die Gemeindegebietsreform im Land Brandenburg. Potsdam, Germany: Kommunalwissenschaftliches Institut .
27.
Némery, J.-C.2004. Réforme de la décentralisation. In Annuaire 2004 des collectivites territoriales, edited by G. Marcou and H. Wollmann , 67-87. Paris: CNRS.
28.
Norton, A.1991. Western European local government in comparative perspective . In Local government in Europe: Trends and development, edited by R. Batley and G. Stoker, 21-40. London: Macmillan .
29.
Norton, A.1994. International handbook of local and regional government . Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
30.
Ostrom, V. and E. Ostrom1999, Public Goods and Public Choices, in: Polycentricity and Local Public Economies. Readings from the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, edited by M. McGinnis , 75-105, Anna Arbor; University of Michigan Press.
31.
Peters, G.B.1995. Political institutions: Old and new. In A new handbook of political science, edited by R. Goodin and H.-D. Klingemann, 125-36. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press.
32.
Peters, G.B.1998. Managing horizontal government: The politics of coordination . Public Administration76:294-311.
Pierson, P.2000. Increasing returns: Path dependence and the study of politics . American Political Science Review94:251-67.
35.
Przeworski, A., and H. Teune.1970. The logic of comparative social inquiry . New York: John Wiley.
36.
Rhodes, R.1997. Understanding governance. Buckingham , UK: Open Univ. Press.
37.
Scharpf, F.W.1997. Games real actors play: Actor centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder, CO: Westview.
38.
Schmidt, V.2008. Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science11 (June 2008), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1141448.
39.
Stewart, J.2000. The nature of British local government. London: Macmillan.
40.
Swianiewicz, P., ed., 2010. Special issue on territorial reform and consolidation in Europe, guest editor . Local Government Studies36:2.
41.
Swianiewicz, P., ed. 2010. Territorial consolidation reforms in Europe. Budapest: OSI.
42.
Thoenig, J.C.2003. Institutional theories and public institution. In Handbook of public administration, edited by G. B. Peters and J. Pierre, 127-37. London : Sage.
43.
Thoenig, J.C.2006. Sub-national government and the centralized state: A French paradox. In Comparing public sector reforms in France and Germany , edited by V. Hoffmann-Martinot and H. Wollmann, 39-58. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
44.
Verba, S.1967. Some dilemmas of comparative research. World Politics20:111-28.
45.
Vranksbaek, K.2010. Structural reform in Denmark. In Territorial consolidation reforms in Europe, edited by P. Swianiewicz, 27-44. Budapest: OSI.
46.
West, K.2007. Inter-municipality in France: Incentives, instrumentality and empty shells. In Inter-municipal cooperation in Europe , edited by R. van Hülst and A. van Monfort, 67-91. Berlin: Springer.
47.
Wilson, D., and C. Game.2006. Local government in the United Kingdom . 4th ed. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
48.
Wollmann, H.2003a. Coordination in the intergovernmental setting. In Handbook of public administration, edited by G. B. Peters and J. Pierre, 594-603. London : Sage.
49.
Wollmann, H.2003b. Local government and politics in East Germany. In The Berlin republic. German unification and a decade of changes , edited by W. Gellner and J. D. Robertson, 153-79. London: Frank Cass.
50.
Wollmann, H.2004a. Local government reforms in Great Britain, Sweden, Germany and France: Between multi-function and single-purpose organizations. Local Government Studies30:639-66.
51.
Wollmann, H.2004b. The two waves of territorial reform of local government in Germany. In Redrawing local government boundaries, edited by J. Meligrana, 106-29. Vancouver : Univ. of British Columbia Press.
52.
Wollmann, H.2006. Introduction. In Annuaire 2006 des Collectivités Locales, edited by G. Marcou and H. Wollmann, 117-21. Paris: CNRS.
53.
Wollmann, H.2008a. Comparing local government reforms in England, Sweden, France and Germany. http://www.wuestenrot-stiftung.de/download/local-government .
54.
Wollmann, H.2008b. Reformen in Kommunalpolitik und-verwaltung. England, Schweden, Frankreich und Deutschland im Vergleich. Wiesbaden , Germany: VS Verlag.
55.
Wollmann, H.2008c. Reforming local leadership and local democracy. The cases of England, Sweden, Germany and France. Local Government Studies34:279-95.
56.
Wollmann, H.2009. The ascent of the directly elected mayor in European local government in West and East. In Local political leadership in Europe, edited by H. Reynaert, et al., H. Reynaert, K. Styvers, P. Delwit and J.-B.Pilet, eds.115-49. Bruges, Belgium: Vanden Broele.
57.
Wollmann, H.2010a. La réforme des collectivités locales: Vers un "big bang" ou une autre "mini" réforme ? In Quelle nouvelle réforme pour les collectivités territoriales françaises? Edited by J.-C. Némery, 349-59. Paris : L’Hammatan.
58.
Wollmann, H.2010b. Territorial local level reforms in the East German regional states (Länder): Phases, patterns, dynamics. Local Government Studies36:249-68.
59.
Wollmann, H., and G. Bouckaert.2006. State organisation in France and Germany: Between "territoriality" and "functionality." In State and local government reforms in France and Germany. Convergence and divergence , edited by V. Hoffmann-Martinot and H. Wollmann, 11-37. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
60.
Wollmann, H., and G. Marcou. Forthcoming. Public services from public sector to private sector provision (and reverse?). In Provision of public services in Europe. Between state, local government and market, edited by H. Wollmann and G. Marcou.Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar .
61.
Wollmann, H., and K. Thurmaier. Forthcoming. Reforming local government institutions and the new public management in Europe and in the US. In Oxford handbook of urban politics, edited by K. Moosberger, S. Clarke, and P. John.Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press .
