Du clientélisme à la technocratie : cent ans de démocratie communale dans une grande ville, Toulouse

Abstract

The remarkable stability of the ruling teams the paucity of conflicts between the municipality and central power, the progression of participation in local elections until 1935 and then, after World War II, the increase of abstentionism on the one hand, and on the other, the growth of municipal intervention, are examples of some of the major trends in the evolution of municipal power in Toulouse since 1884. Three patterns of municipal democracy can be observed: radical clientelisi democracy (1888-1912), the political-administrative machine of municipal socialism (1925-1940), the local peripheric technostructure (1959-1971). These patterns represent both historic stages of a general process of change in the municipal institution, and forms of local government linked to the objectives and to the specific political practices of municipal teams.

Decentralisation in France: new citizenship or restructuring hegemony?

“…Apart from these, political representation relied on a body of political personnel circulating within the hierarchy of parliamentary levels, from local to national. And large cities particularly were able to develop specific politically and economically meaningful policies of their own (see for example, Nevers 1983). It was the highly conflictual conditions of the establishment of the new state under the Fifth Republic, and the permanence of these conditions, that led to the central level controlling very closely resources and policies not only for economic intervention and planning (as in many countries) but also those designed to achieve the rapid development of social welfare and collective consumption.…”

Introduction

“…Certains travaux ont montré que le développement du secteur paramunicipal (associations, sociétés d'économie mixte (SEM), agences d'urbanismes, Offices publics HLM, etc.) a constitué une des voies, discrètes, de la création de l'entourage des élus (Jobert et Sellier, 1977 ;Nevers, 1983 ;Sadran, 1987), à côté des associations d'élus locaux et des rares permanents directement pris en charge par les partis politiques.…”