Regional policy variation in Germany: the diversity of living conditions in a ‘unitary federal state’

Abstract

The German federal system is conventionally understood as highly coordinated between federal and regional governments and aimed at producing a 'uniformity' of living conditions. This view has increasingly been challenged as new work focuses on innovation and diversity at the regional level, and also as a consequence of reforms to the federal system that took place in 2006. This article attempts to establish a more systematic basis for assessing and explaining the scope and significance of regional policy variation in Germany. Our findings suggest that -despite institutional structures that foster intense coordination between central and regional governments and apparent popular preferences for uniformity of policy outcomes-the extent of policy variation in Germany is much greater than conventionally understood and driven both by structural factors and partisan choices at the regional level.

Coping with power dispersion? Autonomy, co-ordination and control in multilevel systems

“…Going back to the canon of the Politikverflechtung, Jeffery et al (2014) highlight how the quintessentially entangled federal system of Germany -the template for Scharpf's joint-decision trap depiction of the EU -is nonetheless characterized by significant policy variation. Even within an integrated political system, where interdependence is strengthened via intense co-ordination legitimized by a constitutional obligation to guarantee the uniformity of living conditions, policy divergence still occurs and seems at least partially driven by institutional and party-political factors.…”

“…The first contribution by Jeffery et al (2014) picks on the case of Germany, which is an instance of a mature as well as a relatively 'unitary' federation. Indeed, owing to its highly co-ordinated nature, its dense institutional structures and constitutional requirement to provide uniform living conditions to its citizens, Germany becomes an intriguing case of the tensions between downwards dispersion, policy co-ordination and autonomy.…”

“…They have done so by allowing derogations and opt-outs to common rules (Martinsen and Wessel 2014), thus compromising the logic of integration itself (Adler-Nissen 2014; Leuffen et al 2012). They have also done so by accepting policy differentiation despite constitutional provisions guaranteeing uniformity (Jeffery et al 2014). Furthermore, they have included some of their regions in the co-determination of national and supranational policies (Tatham 2011), hence contributing to ring-fencing regional competences from EU encroachment (Tatham and Bauer 2014).…”

Regionalization and the Transformation of Policies, Politics, and Polities in Europe

“…However, it has also been the case in regionalized countries such as Spain and Italy, in areas such as welfare and social programme (Moreno and Trelles, 2005;Subirats, 2005;Vampa, 2014Vampa, , 2016. Even in more symmetrical systems such as Germany, where constitutional provisions theoretically guarantee a certain 'uniformity' of living conditions, significant policy divergence has been observed (Jeffery and Pamphilis, 2016;Jeffery et al, 2014). Hence, empowered regions have sought to exercise their authority in the policy sphere so that distinct preferences may translate into divergent policy outputs.…”

On a Successful Road to ‘More Federalism’ in Länder Politics? The Case of Smoking Bans after Germany's Federalism Reform

“…19 A recent analysis by Jeffery et al confirmed that the extent of policy variation between the Länder is much greater than conventionally understood. 20 In their conclusion to an edited volume examining Länder policies in 14 policy fields, Wolf and Hildebrandt also outline -beside areas of great uniformity -substantially diversified policy outputs. 21 Further analyses looking at certain policy fields produced similar results, for example, Blancke 22 (labour market policy), Münch 23 (education policy), Seeger 24 (environmental policy) and Turner 25 (education, family and childcare, labour market policy).…”