GOLD Report I - UCLG

129I. IntroductionThe Europe under study in this chapter coversmore than the European Union (EU)and less than Europe the geographical entitybecause the area discussed here ends atthe eastern border of the European Union.The states that make up this region (35) are morediverse than ever, yet they share two intrinsiccharacteristics that distinguish themfrom all other geo-political regions: 1) Everypart of their territories is administered by amunicipal government; 2) All of these statesrecognize a discrete set of fundamentalprinciples on which local democracy is based.These principles, drawn up and implementedwith the participation of localauthorities and their organizations, wereenshrined in the 1985 European Charter ofLocal Self-Government, which has sincebeen ratified by several states outside theregion defined here. Moreover, local selfgovernmenthas been recognized as a governingprinciple by the EU.However, behind this broad agreement onbasic principles lies a striking variety ofinstitutions and practices, and quite distinctivenational exigencies. The traditionaldiversity typical of the western states hasnow been increased by the central andeastern new member states of the EuropeanUnion, in which the principle of localself-government has only been translatedsince the 1990s into institution-building.Also joining in the process are other statesin South-eastern Europe, where reformsare even more recent and fragile. Despiteall this diversity, a number of major trendsin common can be identified.The first such trend concerns territorial organization.The European countries seemto be entering a new phase of territorial reformthat is significantly different fromthose of the 1960s and 1970s. Not all statesare similarly affected by this development;some in fact remain outside of it. Inessence, the new territorial reforms areconcerned with strengthening the municipaland inter-municipal frameworks, thetrend toward regionalization, and problemsrelated to organizing urban areas.The reforms of the 1960s and 1970s setthe scene for two contrasting approachesto local government: the council as providerof public services (epitomized by theUnited Kingdom), and the council as publicbody based on a community of local people(epitomized by France). The countries thatfollowed the second approach did not undergoterritorial reforms at the time, butsince the late 1990s these reforms areback on the agenda because of the nowinescapable need to rationalize local governmentstructures. Such reforms alwaysaim at getting first-tier local governments 1to take on greater responsibilities, directlyor indirectly, by giving them adequate capacityto do so. What has sometimes workedagainst this approach, however, hasbeen an avowed policy of bringing localgovernment closer to local people; afterregime changes in Eastern Europe, thislocalizing trend led to the break-up ofmany councils in the Czech Republic, Hungary,Slovak Republic, and the states thatonce comprised Yugoslavia, Serbia andMontenegro excepted for the moment.The other important development in termsof territorial organization has been regionalization.Contrary to many assumptions,regionalization is much more a functionalissue than an institutional one. Far morethan a question of the number and characterof institutions, regionalization concernsterritorial policies adopted in response toproblems that are neither strictly local nornational. Regionalization manifests itselfvery differently depending on the constitutionalframework of each state, and on howit cuts across issues peculiar to that country.While it concerns urban organization inthe Netherlands or institutional regionalismin Spain, regionalization takes many otherforms as well. Sometimes it is a layer addedto traditional intermediary authorities,without undermining them, as is the casewith the French département. These examplesalso serve to draw attention to theEvery part of theirterritories isadministered by amunicipalgovernment and allof these statesrecognizea discrete setof fundamentalprinciples on whichlocal democracy isbased1. The “first-tier” orpremier degré isthat of basiccommunity-levellocal government,however they aredefined within thenational context.