Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems: conceptualizing decentralization effects from a comparative perspective
| Author | Ellen Wayenberg,Sabine Kuhlmann |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852315583194 |
| Published date | 01 June 2016 |
| Date | 01 June 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Special Issue Articles |
International Review of
Administrative Sciences
2016, Vol. 82(2) 233–254
!The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020852315583194
ras.sagepub.com
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
Article
Institutional impact assessment
in multi-level systems:
conceptualizing decentralization
effects from a comparative
perspective
Sabine Kuhlmann
Potsdam University, Germany
Ellen Wayenberg
Ghent University, Belgium
Abstract
Comparative literature on institutional reforms in multi-level systems proceeds from a
global trend towards the decentralization of state functions. However, there is only
scarce knowledge about the impact that decentralization has had, in particular, upon the
sub-central governments involved. How does it affect regional and local governments?
Do these reforms also have unintended outcomes on the sub-central level and how can
this be explained? This article aims to develop a conceptual framework to assess the
impacts of decentralization on the sub-central level from a comparative and policy-
oriented perspective. This framework is intended to outline the major patterns and
models of decentralization and the theoretical assumptions regarding de-/re-centraliza-
tion impacts, as well as pertinent cross-country approaches meant to evaluate and
compare institutional reforms. It will also serve as an analytical guideline and a structural
basis for all the country-related articles in this Special Issue.
Points for practitioners
Decentralization reforms are approved as having a key role to play in the attainment of
‘good governance’. Yet, there is also the enticement on the part of state governments to
offload an ever-increasing amount of responsibilities to, and overtask, local levels of
government, which can lead to increasing performance disparities within local sub-state
jurisdictions. Against this background, the article provides a conceptual framework to
assess reform impacts from a comparative perspective. The analytical framework can be
Corresponding author:
Sabine Kuhlmann, Potsdam University, Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakulta
¨t, Lehrstuhl fu¨r
Politikwissenschaft, Verwaltung und Organisation, August-Bebel-Str. 89, Haus 2, D-14482 Potsdam, Germany.
Email: Sabine.Kuhlmann@uni-potsdam.de
used by practitioners to support their decisions about new decentralization strategies
or necessary adjustments regarding ongoing reform measures.
Keywords
administrative reform, comparison, coordination, effectiveness, efficiency, impact
assessment, institutional reform, local government
The issue
Recently, Western Europe has been subject to a wave of sub-central
reforms. Comparative literature on institutional reforms in multi-level systems
proceeds from a global trend towards the decentralization of state functions
(Denters and Rose, 2005; Ongaro et al., 2010; Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2004;
Stoker, 1991):
Political Decentralization is in fashion. ... It is hard to think of any other constitu-
tional feature – except perhaps democracy itself – that could win praise from both Bill
Clinton and George W. Bush, Newt Gingrich and Jerry Brown, Franc¸ ois Mitterrand
and Jacques Chirac, Ernesto Zedillo and Vicente Fox, Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris
Yeltsin. (Treisman, 2007: 1–2.)
However, until now, most of the analytical perspective tended to focus dispropor-
tionately on investigations into de-/re-centralization policy as a dependent variable.
There are extensive accounts of the reform motives, goals and actors, policy devel-
opment, and state of implementation (Goldsmith and Page, 2010; Knoepfel, 2009;
Ongaro et al., 2010; Swianiewicz, 2010). Much less is known about the impact that
decentralization has had, in particular, upon the sub-central governments involved.
How does it affect regional and local governments? Do they merely impact upon
the latter as intended and foreseen? Or, do these reforms also have unintended
outcomes on the sub-central level? Most importantly, what factors explain their
sub-central impact? Briefly, what are the effects that decentralization has on the
actual functioning, the institutional reality and the performance of local and regio-
nal governments? From this analytical perspective, institutional reforms in the
intergovernmental setting are perceived as the independent variable, the outcomes
of which are under investigation.
We will proceed in four steps: first, the article will elaborate some basic hypoth-
eses on decentralization effects, drawing on pertinent institutional theories. In
the second step, the major patterns and models of decentralization put forward
in the relevant literature will be discussed. Third, we outline the analytical dimen-
sions for a comparative assessment of decentralization effects, drawing on evalu-
ation literature and research. Last, we will identify the factors that can theoretically
be assumed to influence the causal relationship between decentralization and per-
formance, particularly policy properties, country-specific governance structures/
234 International Review of Administrative Sciences 82(2)
To continue reading
Request your trial