Canada and Australia bear many similarities, but historical developments have affected the way each country practices federalism. This article seeks to answer the following question: Why have institutionalized horizontal relations been present in Canadian intergovernmental relations (IGR), while they have generally not in Australia? Developments in each country have produced different dynamics in intergovernmental relations which serve to favour vertical relations in Australia and open up space for horizontal relations in Canada. These dynamics become especially apparent when the histories of the institutions for facilitating intergovernmental relations in each country, notably the Canadian Council of the Federation and the Council of Australian Governments, are considered.
Over the 20 th century the field of comparative politics was subject to a debate about the proper way of theorizing the state. Society-centric scholars initially put the state in the background, while later state-centric authors brought the state back in, making it the focal point of their analysis. Dissatisfied with both, Joel S Migdal published State in Society (2001), which advocated for a rethinking of the study of the state. Migdal argued that the state must be considered as a fragmented actor among many others in society. This theory of fragmentation of the state would seem to be naturally applicable to the study of federalism. Yet this has not been the case. This paper argues that Migdal's approach would be a useful addition to the study of federalism and intergovernmental relations, using Canada as a test case. A brief review of some key literature first places Migdal's approach in terms of the broader debate between 'societalists' and 'statists'. Migdal's approach is then applied to a particular facet of the literature on Canadian federalism: executive federalism. The paper concludes that although federalism in Canada has been studied extensively, Migdal's notion of 'state in society' would provide us a useful way to further our understanding of federalism and intergovernmental relations.
Canada is an "under-institutionalized" federation (Cameron and Simeon, 2002b). In the extensive world of intergovernmental relations (IGR) which exist between the federal, provincial and territorial governments, formal relations are said to be "the tip of the iceberg" (Kernaghan, 1985: 156). This leaves a good deal of governmental activity in Canada within the realm of 'informal relations,' a world of intergovernmental relations between public servants without formal rules to guide the process. Broadly considered, those relations are important (Inwood et al., 2011). However, scholarship is not neutral on this point: informal relations are frequently treated as being unstructured and inefficient (Meekison et al., 2004). This dissertation tackles the issue of informal relations by asking, at the level of public servants, what are the effects of informal relations on intergovernmental relations? If they are 'important,' what is the nature of this importance? Using a model derived from primary research, the study explores how context shapes informal relations in three case studies of intergovernmental relations: the Agreement on Internal Trade, the Health Care Innovation Working Group, and the Ministerial Conference on the Canadian Francophonie. By focusing on variables at various levels, one can better understand how informality operates in a given context. The study makes two central arguments: first, that informality should not be equated with disorder. By examining the environment in which informal relations occur, one can better understand the effects of those relations. Second, while informal relations are important, this importance must also be understood in context: informal relations have effects on the speed and efficiency of work among public servants, but the environment in which they occur plays an important role in limiting the effects of informality. Thus, the effects of informal relations are shaped by context. Informal relations are present and
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.