THE EXECUTIVEEmilia Zankina

Comparative Politics

Presidential government

Head of state and head of government Directly elected president Fixed term of office Clear separation of power between

executive and legislative branches The US system The Brazilian system

Parliamentary system

Government emerges from the majority in parliament No clear separation of power Compatibility rules

Prime minister is first among equals Cabinet/council of ministers

A ceremonial head of state

Parliamentary government

Majority government Usually in SMDP systems

Minority and coalition government Usually PR systems Minority government Majority coalition Minority coalition Pre- and post-election coalitions Investitute vote

Types of coalitions

Minimum wining Least possible number of parties

Oversized More parties than needed for majority

Grand coalition The two major parties across the political

spectrum Connected coalition

Parties ideologically close to each other Durability of coalitions

Coalition agreements Constructive no confidence vote

Who governs?

Cabinet PM Ministers Head of state

Monarchy President

Popular election Appointment by parliament

Semi-presidential system

Dual executive Elected president PM accountable to parliament Division of authority

President: foreign affairs, appointing cabinet, can dissolve parliament, referendums, veto legislation

PM: domestic affairs The French Fifth Republic

The executive in authoritarian states

Personal rule Lack of constitutional and electoral controls Strong politics and weak institutions

Succession struggle No emphasis on policy Poor governance Africa, the Middle East, Communist

states

The EU executive

The EU commission Transnational level Common EU interest Regulates, does not implement

The Council of Ministers Intergovernmental level National interests Shares legislative and executive functions

with the commission National governments

Implementing EU directives

THE LEGISLATUREEmilia Zankina

Comparative Politics

Legislatures

Symbol of popular representation Pillar of representative democracy

Origins Royal courts of Europe (13-14c): kings

consult the estates (clergy, nobility, commoners) on issues of war, administration, taxation, trade

Gradually grow into guarantees against ruler’s tyranny and bodies of representattion

Structure

Size Reflects the population size, great variation Size not related to strength (China’s

People’s Congress 3,000) Chambers

Unicameral – the norm, typical for unitary states and former colonies

Bicameral – large countries and all federations (but Italy, Romania, Poland)

Reflects popular will

Cheaper More efficient

More decisive Quicker legislative

process More accountable

Upper chamber serves as check and balance

Revise laws and wills

Shares workload Slows down the

legislative process

Unicameral Bicameral

Bicameralism

Weak bicameralism Lower house dominates (UK and parliamentary

systems) Strong bicameralism

Power divided among the two chambers (US and federal systems)

Selection of upper chamber Direct election (US) Indirect election (India,local government) Appointment (Germany, Russia) Usually longer term and staggered election cycles Represents the states at the federal level

Functions of the legislature

Representation The “microcosm” principle

Reserved seats, quotas (for minorities and women)

The party principle Deliberation

Debating on the floor (UK) Committee-based (US)

Legislation The only law-making body in democracies

Functions of the legislature II Authorizing expenditure

Approval of budget Approval of government (in

parliamentary systems) Scrutiny

Votes of confidence Parliamentary control Emergency debates Committee investigations

Legislative committees

Small workgroups Scrutiny Draft bills Link with the executive Bridge between parliamentary groups

Qualities Expertise Intimacy Support

Types Standing: examine and draft bills Select: scrutiny over the executive Ad-hoc: temporary, on pressing issues Conference and mediation committees: in bicameral

legislatures

Members of Parliament (MPs) Career politicians

Training, knowledge, experience Political class with shared interests

Re-election key for the rise of the career politician Re-election the norm in democracies Open seats vs. closed seats: incumbency effect Turnover: greater in party-list PR systems Term limits: reinforce turnover, but reduce

professionalism Celebrity poiticians

Legislatures in authoritarian states

Limited role, shadow institutions Most authoritarian states have

legislatures Functions

Legitimacy Incorporate moderate opponents Raising grievances – feedback, integrates

center and periphery Recruiting pool for elites

THE JUDICIARYEmilia Zankina

Comparative Politics

Concepts

Rule of law One law for all Legal restraint on government Laws are

General Public Prospective Clear Consistent Practical Stable

Due process: respect for individual legal rights

Precedent based Rulings not explicitly

treated in legislation Juries – peer law Judge-made law High judicial

independence Originates in the UK

and former colonies

Based on written legal codes

Judges apply the law, but do not interpret it

Judges weigh the facts, not juries

Originates with Roman Law

Common Law Civil Law

Constitutions Set out the formal structure of the state

Specifies the powers and institutions of central government and its relationship with other levels

Create limits on government power State individual rights

Codified: a single document Uncodified (UK): spread among various

documents, relies on tradition and practice Amendments

Rigid constitutions Flexible constitutions

Origins: regime change, after war rebuilding, independence

Judicial review Abstract review: constitutional courts only Concrete review: supreme and constitutional

courts Supreme Courts (US)

Original jurisdiction and mainly appellate role Concrete review Renders a rigid constitution flexible

Constitutional Courts (Europe) Abstract and concrete review Negative legislators: strike down

unconstitutional bills More political, prevent dictatorship

Judicial activism

How active are supreme and constitutional courts Judicial restraint vs. active involvement Rise in judicial activism

Rise of regulations and growth of government Expansion of international law Positive image as an independent arbiter

Judicial independence

External independence Tenure (US – life tenure, Europe – terms) Recruitment

Appointment Elections Co-option

Internal independence: autonomy of junior from senior judges

Administrative law

Difference from constitutional law that sets out the power map

Focus on rules of governing: how to judge maladministration Competence Procedure Fairness Liability

Every country has administrative law even in the absence of administrative courts

Constitutional Court Administrative Court Supreme Court

Does not deal with constitutional or administrative matters

Court of appeal for civil, criminal and trade cases

No constitutional or administrative court

Supreme Court Deals with all

cases Constitutional Administrative Civil Criminal Trade

Separatist approach Inegrationalist approach

Legal pluralism

More than one justice system in a single state + supports a multicultural society - creates conflicts between legal codes

Examples: International vs. domestic law Indigenous law Islamic law Professional and guild codes of ethics

Law in authoritarian states

Little constraint on executive by judiciary There is a legal framework, yet:

Judges subject to political pressure Through recruitment, training, evaluation,

promotion and disciplining Inadequate and outdated laws Insufficient resources and training Lack of the trust in the legal process Frequent bypass of the judicial process

Special courts Decrees and declarations of emergency

MULTI-LEVEL GOVERNANCEEmilia Zankina

Comparative Politics

The Meaning of Multi-level Governance

Governance implies both public and private actors take part in policy-making and implementation

Multi-level implies that government has tiers Multi-level governance refers to the

relationship between the tiers of government Levels of government

National: federal vs. unitary states Regional government Local government

Federalism

Federalism is the principle of sharing sovereignty and power between central and state (or provincial) governments A federation is a political system based on

that principle Due to shared sovereignty neither level can

abolish the other A Confederation is loosely linked, preserving

separate statehood, more than an alliance but less than a federation, weaker central government

Functions of Federal Systems The center: foreign relations, defense,

immigration, currency, etc. The State/province: education, law enforcement,

local government; powers not specifically allocated lie with the state

Symmetrical federalism: all states with the federation have equal status

Asymmetrical federalism: some states enjoy greater autonomy (ex. Quebec)

Dual federalism (US): the two levels operate independently

Cooperative federalism (Germany): collaboration between levels, based on subsidiarity

Origins of Federations

Creating a new central authority (dominant scenario)

Transferring authority to lower levels (ex. Belgium becomes a federation in 1993)

Federations are not the norm (22 federations) Confederations very rare

The Confederate states of American 1781 The Swiss Confederation started out as a

confederation but evolved into a federation despite the name

Federalism’s Pro and Con

Practical for large countries

Checks and balances

Preserves cultural differences

Reduces the workload of central government

Practical for policy experiments

Clumsy decision-making policy

Can entrench divisions

Complicated accountability

Difficult to carry out national policy

Strengths Weaknesses

Unitary States Most states are unitary

Monarchies usually evolve into unitary states Small countries are usually unitary Post-colonial states often evolve into unitary states

Sovereignty lies with the central government which can abolish lower levels

Methods of dispersing power from the center Deconcentration: territorial dispersion of central

gov’t Decentralization: delegating functions to lower

levels Devolution: decision-making authority for lower

levels (Wales and Scotland in 1999)

Regional Government

Middle tier of government – meso level Emerged with war reconstruction Focus on economic development and

public infrastructure, i.e. reducing inequalities between regions

Status is determined by whether regional authorities are elected or appointed by the central government

Examples: France, Italy, Poland, Bulgaria

Local Government Exists both in federal and unitary states Positives

Represents natural communities Accessible to citizens Reinforces local identities First response and distribution of services Recruiting ground for higher government

positions Negatives

Lacks financial autonomy Too small to efficiently deliver services Easily dominated by local elites

Structure of Local Government Council system: elected council,

appointed mayor (Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden)

Mayor-council system: elected mayor (executive function), elected council (legislative function) – NYC, Chicago, London

Council-manager system: elected council, ceremonial mayor, appointed manager – goal is to depoliticize (Dallas, Phoenix, Cork)

Status and relationship of local government with the center

General competence principle: greater role for local government,(Northern Europe)

Ultra vires (beyond the powers): limited function, only explicitly delegated authority (Southern Europe)

Dual system (UK): formal separation of central and local government, more autonomy for local government

Fused system (France): center dominates and oversees implementation of national policy

Local government

Authoritarian states Top-down approach: local government

establishes the presence of the ruler Personalized, not institutionalized, relations

Rulers relies on local bosses Illiberal democracies

Centralism and paternalism Lack of capacity of local government Personalized relations matter over

institutional roles

THE BUREACRACYEmilia Zankina

Comparative Politics

Evolution and Definition

Rule by officials Salaried official who form the public

administration and advise on and implement government policy

Evolved from royal households in Europe Merit-based (Europe) vs. spoils system

(US) Growth of the bureaucracy after World

War Two Thatcherism and the cut in size and

budget Economy, efficiency, effectiveness

Weberian Spoils

Merit-based system

Recruitment based on competence

Divisions of tasks Decisions made

based on rules and procedures

Hierarchical structure

Recruitment based on seniority and merit

Political loyalty more important than skills

Positions given in return for support

Complete turnover with each government

Government by the common man, no professional civil service

Recruitment

Recruitment to the system as a whole

General knowledge

Vertical and horizontal mobility

UK, France, EU

Recruitment to a specific position

Technical knowledge

Vertical mobility (or into the private sector)

US, Netherlands, New Zealand

Unified approach Departmental approach

Affirmative action

Policies design to compensate for past discrimination Applying lower recruitment standards to members

of disadvantaged groups and gaining diversity Positive aspects

Stability in divided societies Ripple effect Acceptability of decisions Positive attitude towards bureacrats

Negative aspects Incompetence Education a better strategy

Organization

Departments/ministries Core of central government Hierarchical internal structure Varies between 12-24

Divisions/sections/bureaus Operating units within departments/ministries Concentration of expertise May have considerable independence

Non-departmental public bodies and QUANGOs Service delivery bodies Regulatory agencies Advisory bodies

Accountability

The problem of political control over the bureaucracy

Internal control Ministerial direction Regulators Professional standards

External controls Legislation (reporting) and judiciary

(administrative law) Omudsman Interest groups and mass media

New Public Management (NPM) Applying business models to the public

sector More successful in Anglo-American

countries Components of NPM

Managerial discretion Performance assessment Resource allocation based on results Greater independence to units Flexibility in recruiting and retaining staff Cost cuts

E-government

Use of ICT in providing public services Levels

Information Interaction Transaction Integration

Privacy issues