Autonomy or integration: Historical analysis of the debate on the purpose of Icelandic local self-government

Abstract

An ongoing debate on the purpose of local self-government in Iceland has been simmering mainly between those who believe that local authorities should amalgamate in order to assume more responsibilities and those who believe that local autonomy, understood as the right of citizens to govern their own jurisdictions, should not be weakened. The purpose of this study is to discuss the role of local self-government in Iceland from these two very different perspectives by situating it within the context of the Nordic model of local self-government. This study’s findings reveal that the Icelandic central government has successfully introduced functional reforms at the local level over the past 25 years, but it has not been as successful in initiating territorial reforms. The findings also show that conflict between the ideologies of the traditional autonomous model and the more modern model of integration is growing.

Local administrative capacity based on the presence of expert staff in municipal city halls and inter-municipal cooperation entities

“…in pre-school and primary school education, social services 1 and disability services. Furthermore, they are also responsible for tasks such as waste management and planning (Hlynsdóttir 2018a).…”

“…As the role of local authorities has grown in the provision of welfare services, the questions regarding the purpose of local government in relation to democracy and efficiency have become even more important (Denters, Goldsmith, Ladner, Mouritzen, & Rose 2014) and Iceland is not an exception to that rule. Thus, the issue of consolidation versus fragmentation of local government has become highly relevant and has greatly influenced public debate (Hlynsdóttir 2018a;Eythórsson 2014). There is a robust body of research available on various types of local reforms in the international setting (Askim, Klausen, Vabo, & Bjurstrom 2016;Bel & Gradus 2018;Feiock 2007;Hulst & Montfort 2007;Tavares 2017;Teles 2016).…”

“…138/2011 states that citizens must be allowed a binding referendum on proposed amalgamation schemes. Therefore, although the state has successfully decentralised welfare services, which has resulted in a large-scale voluntary municipal merger, this has happened in an unplanned and unregulated way (Hlynsdóttir 2018a). Although the number of municipalities went from a whopping 204 municipalities in 1990 down to 76 in 2006, the Icelandic local government system is still highly fragmented, with 39 municipalities with less than 1,000…”