New Localism and Neutralizing Local Government: Has Anyone Bothered Asking the Public for Its Opinion?

Abstract

New Localism has attracted growing interest among both researchers and practitioners who deal with local governance. Although most research on the subject has emphasized institutional and national points of view, this study aims to elucidate public opinion toward a governmental policy that for some fundamentally contradicts and for others goes hand in hand with the principles of New Localism: namely, an end-case scenario under which the central government neutralizes failing local authorities. Following Ford's (Ford, Richard T., 1999, Law's territory (A history of jurisdiction), Michigan Law Review 97:843-930) pioneering work "Law's Territory (A History of Jurisdiction)," we suggest a model that predicts the members of the public, based on individual-and community-level characteristics, who are likely to support the neutralization approach and further test the model using a field study of 1,321 residents of Israeli local authorities. Our analyses identified two individual-level factors (satisfaction with local services and social trust) and three community-level characteristics (socioeconomic status, ethnic majority versus minority population, and previous history of neutralization) that influence whether individuals are likely to support or oppose the neutralization approach. Implications of the findings are developed and discussed. INTROduCTION The justification for local government and localism is well rooted in theoretical and practical concepts of pluralism, diffusion of powers, responsiveness to local needs, efficiency of local services, opportunity for political participation, and the democratic right to elect, be elected to, and fill local executive roles (Jones and Stewart 1983; Mill 1991; Pratchett 2004). Subsidiarity is a more recent justification that has been integrated into national policies throughout the Western world (Council of Europe 1985, art. 4; Pratchett 2004). However, as we will show in this article, some dimensions of localism act as a double-edged sword. More specifically, the granting of legal status to organic jurisdictions-distinct social and political communities-may be aimed not

Lack of reform in Israeli local government and its impact on modern developments in public management

“…Sound authorities were given more latitude in their local budgets and the ability to make legislative and organizational changes as well as to real estate transactions. However, to date, only 29 (11.2%) local authorities have met the criteria for soundness (Beeri and Razin 2015) and their soundness has not affected neighbouring municipalities (Beeri and Yuval 2013).…”

Biased Policy and Political Behavior: The Case of Uneven Removal of Elected Mayors in Israel

“…Beeri and Yuval () provide direct evidence on the level of support for central government intervention in running local municipalities by ethnic origin (i.e., national majority and minority groups). Their survey of 1,321 residents in 156 municipalities specifically covers questions on the respondents’ attitudes toward appointed committees.…”

“…Their survey of 1,321 residents in 156 municipalities specifically covers questions on the respondents’ attitudes toward appointed committees. For example, one of the questions is: “In cases of local crisis, replacing the elected leadership with a convened committee appointed by the Ministry of Interior is an appropriate decision” (Beeri and Yuval , 641). They found that residents of municipalities without an appointed committee tend to support such intervention, but residents in intervened municipalities are more likely to oppose it.…”

“…As we discuss above, there is strong evidence that Arab citizens—especially in intervened municipalities—view the imposition of appointed committees as an act of discrimination by the central government. As Beeri and Yuval () show, the reduction in local autonomy of Arab residents has been done by the central government against the will of citizens in intervened Arab municipalities (the Arab target population). We assume that the policy intervention raises group consciousness of Arab citizens and political awareness regarding their deprived position in the general population and their dedication to political action to promote their cause.…”

“…As Beeri and Yuval () found, the target population in Jewish municipalities opposed the intervention which implies that residents in intervened municipalities have perceived the removal of their local elected representatives as yet another way to cut poor sections in the Israeli society from participating in local decision making rather than an insurance device to deal with failed mayors (electoral‐error‐correction). The intervention may even further decrease the low sense of EPE that characterizes poor people in general.…”