GOLD Report I - UCLG

EUROPE134 United Cities and Local GovernmentsTerritorial reform and functional reformThe great territorial reforms of the past did meet objectives of functional reform 7 .In Greece for example, the municipal reform of 1912 allowed for any built-uparea with a population of more than 300 and a primary school to constitute itselfas a municipality. In Sweden, the territorial reforms of 1952 and 1970 were devisedmainly in order to help implement state education reforms at the municipallevel. In Germany, the municipal reforms of 1965-1975 were based on the theoryof central places, whereby a whole range of services and material resourceswould be provided from these for a given population. These reforms also aimed atgiving municipalities a territorial basis for their powers and responsibilities to beexpanded later through further functional reforms (Germany, Sweden). This hasbeen the case over the last few years in Germany where the governments of certainLänder have transferred new responsibilities to the districts and cities withdistrict status: Baden-Württemberg has undergone the most radical reform, asmost tasks of the field services 8 of the Land government have been transferredto it.7. Functional reforms:reforms concerningthe attribution ofcertain powers andresponsibilities andhaving the aim ofimproving the waysin which these areexercised.8. Field services areadministrativeservices withcompetence for aterritorialjurisdiction that aresubordinated tocentral governmentdepartments. Insome countries theyare referred to as“peripheraladministrations”.The Greek reforms of 1997 illustrate the dramatic shift that took place. This was aradical reform, decreasing the numbers of municipalities (demes and rural councils)from nearly 6,000 to 1,033. But the real innovative aspect of the reform wasthat it was not just an amalgamation plan; it involved also a development andinvestment program, and the territorial reform was a necessary step to implementthat program. The aim was to set up local authorities able to implement it, whichmeant equipping them with the necessary institutions, staff and financial resources.A five-year program (1997-2001) financed by the state was thus the supportframework within which the new municipalities would operate and which wouldhelp finance a capital investment program. The five-year program was also aimedat facilitating the recruitment of managers for the new municipalities and to givethem the necessary human resources for exercising a greater administrative andfinancial autonomy. Another innovative aspect of the reform was to keep a representationof the old local councils in the new local authorities, and secure theirparticipation in the debates of the new municipal council, which doubtless helpedto get the mergers accepted by the local communities.In the new German Länder on the other hand, the transfer of the territorial reformrealized in the west proved at first to be a half-failure. Regrouping smaller municipalitieswas seen as working against the aim of restoring democracy, and intermunicipalbodies (the Verwaltungsgemeinschaft) were set up in order to try andresolve this problem. However, the territorial reforms were successfully completedat the level of the districts. More recently, territorial reform has taken a newturn: the Brandenburg Land has removed many small municipalities by means ofmergers, reducing at the same time the number of inter-municipal bodies, and theMecklemburg-Vorpommern Land has carried out a radical reform of districts, bringingtheir average population to 350,000.