Professor Ivan Koprić University of Zagreb, Croatia

1. Towards Effective Regional Governance Workshop Civic University and the Challenges of Regional GovernanceUniversity of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal, 19 July 2013 Professor Ivan Koprić University of Zagreb, Croatia

2. Introductory remarks • Local self-government as an inevitable component of contemporary democratic systems • No unified model (models: British, Central European or German, southern, Scandinavian, Eastern European …) • Harmonisation (with regard to public services, best practices, fashions, reform waves…) • Development of local self-government roles: administrative r., r. in political democratisation, social, role in economic development

3. Introductory remarks II • Changing economic environment because of wider NPM reforms, economic crises, austerity measures, etc. – focus on public services LSG delivers and their quality, introduction of performance management system, reorientation towards alternative resources (EU funds, borrowing, bonds…) • From previous separation of governmental levels towards multi-level governance • From relatively autonomous functioning of each local unit towards polycentric model, with leading role of urban units (more integrated functioning) • Pressure towards consolidation in certain countries (mergers, rationalisation of structure)

4. What is the result? • Focus on providing public services (orientation towards measurable results) and on support to economic and social development – municipalities have to deliver, not to function, not to politicise, not to administer! • The results (services, support) have to be integrated: municipalities have to have capacities for the whole public policy cycle, from planning to implementation • More integrated, cooperative model of functioning within the public sector, both vertically (inter-level cooperation) and horizontally (inter-municipal cooperation) • Urban units take the leading role, because they have better capacities – opportunity to universities etc.

5. Territorial arrangements in Europe • Differences exist, but have diminished influence on the final output • Countries with many smaller municipalities but two or even three levels of territorial units (France as a model country) • Countries with differences between urban and rural units and one or two levels of units (Germany, it is also a federation!) • Countries with large municipalities and two levels of territorial self-government (Sweden, Denmark) • Countries with extremely large municipalities (Great Britain) • Many subtypes and variations + many reforms • Harmonisation up to a degree under the NUTS classification – at least we can understand each other! • European Union’s regional policy as a source of pressure towards municipal efficiency

6. Regio- • Regionalism – sense of identity and common interests at a wider territory • Regional self-government – middle level with democratically elected bodies (representative ones) – they have political content and frequently show that there exist somehow different interests of wider areas within a country, along with cultural, historical, and other differences • Statistical regions – designed for the EU NUTS classification needs (800,000-3,000,000 inhabitants) • Planning regions, administrative regions, etc. (purpose) • Regional policy – either EU, or national public policy with regard to supporting and fostering social and economic development, taking into account that there are substantial differences between the regions with regard to the developmental degree and needs • Regional development – economic and social development of wider areas within countries

7. Regional self-government in the COE • Regional self-government – European Charter of Regional Self-Government prepared, but not adopted • Other documents have been developed in post-2000 period • Helsinki definition (2002): “RSG denotes the legal competence and ability of regional authorities, within the limits of the Constitution and the law, to regulate and manage a share of public affairs under their own responsibility, in the interests of the regional population and in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.” • Report on European practice and recent developments in the field of regional self-government (2007/08) • Great diversity in size, legal status, purpose, competencies, public resources (financial and personnel), etc. • Upward trend in terms of budgets, personnel, competencies, political and public service providing importance • CoE (CDLR) identified six RSG models

8. Regional self-government models • CoE CDLR classification (based on legal criteria mainly): • Regions with the power to enact primary legislation a) (Austria, Belgium, Finland-Åland, Germany, Italy, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland) • Regions with the power to enact primary legislation b) (UK: Scotland, NI) • Regions with the power to enact legislation, according to the framework established by national legislation, under the constitutional guarantee (Czech R., Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands) • Regions with the power to adopt laws and other reg. legislative acts, in line with national legislation, without the constitutional guarantee (UK-Wales, Poland) • Regions with decision-making power and directly elected councils (Croatia, Denmark, Finland-Kainuu, France, Norway, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, UK-Greater London) (measures to implement national legislation) • Regions with decision-making power and councils elected by the component local authorities (Albania, Finland-others, Latvia, Romania)

9. Governance and regional governance • a continuum with classic, hierarchical government at one pole, and horizontal governance at the other • Inclusive model that connects traditional public actors (municipalities, state bodies, etc.) with civic and private sector actors • from top-down to bottom-up and horizontal lines of influence, more interactions, negotiations and partnerships • frequently developing at the local level: urban and regional g. • why: in order to be more effective, to reduce costs of conflicts, costs of missed opportunities and bad quality of services, costs of service provision, to rise success rate (in getting EU money, for example), etc. • because the public problems, ways of their solving and results have impacts at the broader territory, there is a need for regional governance (+ small municipalities)

10. Models of regional governance Extensively (and prior to Europe) studied in the US. Some of them are: • Informal, ad hoc cooperation: reciprocal actions of neighbouring municipalities (A: flexible, does not need legal changes; DA: difficult to sustain over time, susceptible to shifts in politics and resources, does not function without consensus) • Inter-municipal contracts: usually voluntary contracts, but there is a formal base of cooperation in order to handle specific service responsibilities, or to plan and finance a service that will be delivered by the same provider; municipalities can establish single-purpose bodies for planning, coordinating, delivering (A: more efficient service provision-economy of scale, firmer base of cooperation; DA: possible misinterpretations, who will pay which costs, issue-orientation narrows cooperation)

11. Models of regional governance • Multi-purpose cooperation: voluntary agreements, in order to plan, finance, coordinate and deliver several services within a broader area (A: better planning over time, long-term willingness to cooperate; DA: political accountability, citizens cannot have insight and control, transparency) • Regional councils: a multi-purpose body that serves for the formulation of strategies, policies and projects, along with full support to its member municipalities (A: inclusive, acceptable to municipal politicians as itdoes not require change in local power structure, adaptable forum for cooperation and for solving conflicts; DA: possible shortages in implementation, dependent on local capacities, political content is somewhat weak, because usually there is no direct involvement of citizens)

12. Models of regional governance • Planning or regional development agencies: serve as the support to member municipalities to plan development and support development of the broader territory in more effective and professional way (A: effectiveness, especially if they have their own financial resources, own employees, and organisational autonomy; DA: possible conflicts with municipalities, if they become autarchic) • Consolidation: either merger of small municipalities with a central city or establishment of a new, regional unit with both bodies, legislative and executive, which have their own legitimacy acquired at direct elections, in which case municipalities are deprived from several previous competences (A: stability, democratic legitimacy of the new bodies, reliable partners for national bodies; DA: diminishing local autonomy, power restructuring, etc.)

13. Components of regional governance Which components should be planned in case of formal cooperation: • Cooperative mechanisms and arrangements (which type/s) • Services (cooperation for what) • Decision-making and voting system (how to manage) • Dispute resolution processes • Funding mechanisms to support the provision of services One of the critical issues is the capacity of municipalities and regional governance bodies to effectively design, plan, and implement common policies and serve the citizens (financial, human, organisational, etc. capacities)