Beyond Second Chambers: Alternative Representation of Territorial Interests and Their Reasons

Open access

Abstract

The paper contends that bicameral systems, irrespective of their differences in composition and powers, are unfit to represent territorial interests in the national decisionmaking process, except in some residual cases. What subnational entities seek is participation rather than representation. This is why alternative, executive-based institutions in which also the national government is present are mushrooming and second chambers are ineffective as territorial bodies. Furthermore, there is a clear trend to move from bicameralism to bilateralism, meaning that instead of taking advantage of ineffective multilateral institutions, strong subnational units try to channel their claims through bilateral instruments. Overall, the unresolved dilemma of subnational representation has little to do with the architecture of second chambers and rather lays in the tension between individual and collective representation.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Ackrén Maria Olausson Pär M. 2008 ‘Condition(s) for Island Autonomy’ International Journal on Minority and Group Rights XV(2): 227-258.

  • Adam Marc-Antoine Bergeron Josée and Bonnard Marianne 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in Canada: Competing Visions and Diverse Dynamics’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 135-163.

  • Aja Eliseo and Albertí Rovira Enoch (eds) 2005 La reforma constitucional del Senado Centro de estudios constitucionales Madrid.

  • Albertí Rovira Enoch 2005 ‘El blindatge de les competències i la reforma estatutària’ Revista Catalana de Dret Public no. 31: 109-136.

  • Arretche Marta 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in Brazil: An Unequal Federation with Symmetrical Arrangements’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 108-134.

  • Bauer Hartmut 2002 ‘Entwicklungstendenzen und Perspektiven des Föderalismus in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland‘ Die öffentliche Verwaltung 837-845.

  • Benz Arthur 2007 ‘Inter-regional competition in co-operative federalism: New modes of multi-level governance in Germany’ Regional & Federal Studies XVII(4): 421-436.

  • Bifulco Raffaele 2006 ‘Il modello italiano delle conferenze Stato-autonomie territoriali (anche) alla luce delle esperienze federali’ Le Regioni XXXIV(2-3): 233-268.

  • Bußjäger Peter 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in Austria: Co-operative Federalism as Counterweight to Centralized Federalism’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 81-107.

  • Carnota Walter F. 2015 ‘Intergovernmental relations in Argentina: Systematic Confusion and Predominance of the Centre’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 14-41.

  • Castellà Andreu Josep Maria 2016 ‘Tribunal constitucional y proceso secesionista catalán: respuestas jurídico-constitucionales a un conflicto político-constitucional’ Teoría y Realidad Constitucional no. 37: 561-592.

  • Cosulich Matteo 2017 Il decreto attuativo di attuazione statutaria nelle regioni ad autonomia speciale ESI Napoli.

  • Cruz Villalón Pedro 2006 ‘La reforma del Estado de las autonomías’ Revista d’Estudis Autonòmics i Federals no. 2: 77-99.

  • Dahl Robert A. 1956 A Preface to Democratic Theory University of Chicago Press.

  • Dandoy Régis Dodeigne Jérémy Reuchamps Min and Vandeleene Audrey 2015 ‘The New Belgian Senate. A (Dis)Continued Evolution of Federalism in Belgium?’ Representation - Journal of Representative Democracy LI(3): 327-339.

  • Dehousse Renaud 1989 ‘Il paradosso di Madison: riflessioni sul ruolo delle camere alte nei sistemi federali’ Le Regioni XVII(6) 1365-1400.

  • Docherty David 2002 ‘The Canadian Senate: Chamber of Sober Reflection or Loony Cousin Best Not Talked About’ Journal of Legislative Studies VIII(3): 27-48.

  • Doria Giancarlo 2006 ‘The Paradox of Federal Bicameralism’ 5 European Diversity and Autonomy Papers 1 19-26.

  • Fischer Thomas Hirscher Gerhard Margedant Udo Schick Gerhard and Werner Horst 2004 Föderalismusreform in Deutschland. Ein Leitfaden zur aktuellen Diskussion und zur Arbeit der Bundesstaatskommission Bertelsmann Stiftung Gütersloh.

  • Gamper Anna 2005 ‘A “Global Theory of Federalism”: The Nature and Challenges of a Federal State’ German Law Journal VI(10): 1297- 1318.

  • Gamper Anna 2017a ‘Artikel 35 B-VG’ in Korinek Kark Holoubek Michael et al (eds) Österreichisches Bundesverfassungsrecht Verlag Österreich/C.F. Müller Wien.

  • Gamper Anna 2017b ‘Artikel 36 B-VG’ in Korinek Karl Holoubek Michael et al (eds) Österreichisches Bundesverfassungsrecht Verlag Österreich/C.F. Müller Wien.

  • García Morales Maria Jesús and Arbós Marin Xavier 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in Spain: An Essential but Underestimated Element of the State of Autonomies’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 350-378.

  • Hamilton Alexander Jay John and Madison James 1987 Federalist Papers Penguin Books London.

  • Hänni Peter Belser Eva Maria and Waldmann Bernhard (eds) 2013 20 Jahre KdK Publikationen des Instituts für Föderalismus vol. 4 Stämpfli Bern.

  • Hepburn Eve 2012 ‘Recrafting Sovereignty: Lessons from Small Island Autonomies?’ in Gagnon Alain and Keating Michael (eds) Political Autonomy and Divided Societies. Comparative Territorial Politics PalgraveMacmillan London 118-133.

  • Hopkins Jack W. 1990 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in Mexico and the United States: A Comparative Perspective’ International Review of Administrative Sciences LVI(3): 403-420.

  • Kincaid John 2002 ‘Intergovernmental relations in the United States of America’ in Poirier Johanne and Saunders Cheryl (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems McGill-Queen’s University Press Montreal-Kingston 33-44.

  • Kincaid John 2011 ‘The U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations: Unique Artifact of a Bygone Era’ Public Administration Review LXXI(2): 181-189.

  • Kropp Sabine 2010 Kooperativer Föderalismus und Politikverflechtung Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften Wiesbaden.

  • Lejeune Marc 1990 ‘Les mecanismes de prevention des conflits d'intérêts’ in Alen André (ed) Les conflits d'intérêts. Quelle solution pour la Belgique de domain? La Charte Namur 40-89.

  • Lhotta Roland 2003 ‘Zwischen Kontrolle und Mitregierung. Der Bundesrat als Oppositionskammer?’ Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte B 43: 16-22.

  • Lhotta Roland and von Blumenthal Julia 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in the Federal Republic of Germany’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 206-238.

  • Lim Regina 2008 Federalism-State Relations in Sabah Malaysia ISEAS Singapore.

  • Luthardt Wolfgang 1999 ‘Abschied vom deutschen Konsensmodell? Zur Reform des Föderalismus’ Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte B 13: 12-23.

  • Luther Jörg Passaglia Paolo and Tarchi Rolando (eds) 2006 A World of Second chambers. Handbook for Constitutional Studies on Bicameralism Giuffrè Milan.

  • Medeiros Eduardo (ed) 2018 European Territorial Cooperation Springer New York. · O’Toole Laurence and Christensen Robert 2013 American Intergovernmental Relations 5th ed. Sage London.

  • Palermo Francesco 2008 ‘Implementation and Amendment of the Autonomy Statute’ in Woelk Jens Palermo Francesco and Marko Joseph (eds) Tolerance through Law Martinus Nijhoff Leiden-Boston 143-159.

  • Palermo Francesco and Kössler Karl 2017 Comparative Federalism. Constitutional Arrangements and Case Law Hart Oxford.

  • Palermo Francesco and Nicolini Matteo 2013 Il bicameralismo. Pluralismo e limiti della rappresentanza in prospettiva comparata ESI Napoli.

  • Patterson Samuel and Mughan Anthony 1999 ‘Senates and the Theory of Bicameralism’ in Patterson

  • Samuel Mughan Anthony (eds) Senates: Bicameralism in the Contemporary World Ohio State University Press Cleveland.

  • Pfisterer Thomas 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in Switzerland: An Unfamiliar Term for a Necessary Concept’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 379-410.

  • Phillimore John and Harwood Jeffrey 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in Australia: Increasing Engagement within a Centralizing Dynamic’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 42-80.

  • Poirier Johanne 2002 ‘Formal Mechanisms of Intergovernmental Relations in Belgium’ Regional and Federal Studies XII(3): 24-54.

  • Poirier Johanne and Saunders Cheryl 2015 ‘Conclusion’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 440-498.

  • Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl Kincaid John (eds) 2015 Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems. Comparative Structures and Dynamics Forum of Federations and IACFS Oxford Univ. Press.

  • Powell Derek 2015 ‘Constructing Developmental State in South Africa: The Corporatization of Intergovernmental Relations’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 305-349.

  • Protsyk Oleh 2010 ‘Gagauz autonomy in Moldova: the real and the virtual in post-Soviet state design’ in Weller Marc and Nobbs Katherine (eds) Asymmetric Autonomy and the Settlement of Ethnic Conflicts University of Pennsylvania Press Philadelphia 231-251.

  • Rosner Andreas and Bußjäger Peter (eds) 2011 Im Dienste der Länder - im Interesse des Gesamtstaates Braumüller Wien.

  • Ruggiu Ilenia 2006 Contro la Camera delle regioni: istituzioni e prassi della rappresentanza territoriale Jovene Napoli.

  • Schäffer Heinz 2011 ‘Reformperspektiven für den Bundesrat‘ Journal für Rechtspolitik XV(1): 11-22

  • Scharpf Fritz W. 1976 Politikverflechtung Vol. 1 Theorie und Empirie des kooperativen Föderalismus in der Bundesrepublik Scriptor Kronberg.

  • Scharpf Fritz W. 2009 Föderalismusreform: kein Ausweg aus der Politikverflechtungsfalle? Campus-Verlag Frankfurt-New York.

  • Schmidt Jan Amilcar 2016 ‘Representation of Component Federal Units in Federal Systems’ Max

  • Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law Oxford University Press.

  • Singh Mahendra Prasad and Saxena Rekha 2015 ‘Intergovernmental Relations in India: From Centralization to Decentralization’ in Poirier Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems: Comparative Structures and Dynamics Oxford Univ. Press 239-271.

  • Smith David E. 2003 The Canadian Senate in Bicameral Perspective University of Toronto Press.

  • Smith Troy E. 2015 ‘Intergovernmental relations in the United States of America’ in Poirier

  • Johanne Saunders Cheryl and Kincaid John (eds) Intergovernmental Relations in Federal Systems Oxford Univ. Press 411-439.

  • Steytler Nico (ed) 2017 Concurrent Powers in Federal Systems: Meaning Making Managing Brill Leiden/Boston.

  • Sturm Roland 2003 ‘Zur Reform des Bundesrates. Lehren eines internationalen Vergleiches der

  • Zweiten Kammern’ Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte B 29-30: 24-31. · Swift Elain 2002 The Making of an American Senate: Reconstitutive Change in Congress 1787-1841 University of Michigan Press Chicago.

  • Wasserfallen Fabio 2015 ‘The Cooperative Capacity of Swiss Federalism’ Swiss Political Science Review XXI(4): 538-555.

  • Wassermann Rudolf 2003 ‘Droht Gesetzgebungsstillstand? - Zur Vetomacht des Bundesrates’ Neue Juristische Wochenschrift: 331-332.

  • Watts Ronald L. 1989 Executive Federalism: A Comparative Analysis Queen’s University Kingston.

  • Wilhelm Hennis 1998 Auf dem Weg in den Parteienstaat Reclam Stuttgart.

  • Wood Gordon 1998 The Creation of the American Republic: 1776-1787 University of North Carolina Press Charlotte.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.04

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.105
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.03

Target audience: researchers, academics, practitioners interested in the field of political, economic and legal issues in federal states, regional organizations, and international organizations at global level
Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 252 116 12
PDF Downloads 188 103 7