Abstract
An ongoing debate on the purpose of local self-government in Iceland has been simmering mainly between those who believe that local authorities should amalgamate in order to assume more responsibilities and those who believe that local autonomy, understood as the right of citizens to govern their own jurisdictions, should not be weakened. The purpose of this study is to discuss the role of local self-government in Iceland from these two very different perspectives by situating it within the context of the Nordic model of local self-government. This study’s findings reveal that the Icelandic central government has successfully introduced functional reforms at the local level over the past 25 years, but it has not been as successful in initiating territorial reforms. The findings also show that conflict between the ideologies of the traditional autonomous model and the more modern model of integration is growing.
Highlights
The existing literature on local government typically places all Nordic countries under the Nordic model.1 Traditionally, the Nordic model is epitomised by relatively small local STJÓRNMÁL &governments and a high concentration of local government control over service delivery, which, in some cases, predates World War II
In the Icelandic context, both cleavages have proven to be highly relevant in explaining the presence of political conflict (Hlynsdóttir & Önnudóttir forthcoming). When it comes to explaining the development of local government reforms, this study relies on historical institutionalism, which draws on the idea that policy choices initially made when an institution or a policy programme is created will have a lasting influence on the institution or policy in the future
The findings of this study show that Icelandic government structure at the local level has persisted on a path of maintaining high autonomy and a large number of small and densely populated municipalities since the establishment of the current system in the late 19th century
Summary
The existing literature on local government typically places all Nordic countries under the Nordic model. Traditionally, the Nordic model is epitomised by relatively small local. A heavy emphasis on welfare service delivery has led to high levels of professional local bureaucracy (Goldsmith & Larsen 2004). Local leaders in the Nordic model are less likely to have a strong territorial role than French local leaders, for example This situation is summed up nicely by Kuhlmann and Wollmann (2014, 18): ‘[Nordic] countries possess a highly decentralised administrative structure, with, by tradition, politically and functionally strong local governments’. This high level of autonomy is further confirmed in the Local Autonomy Index (LAI) in which (unlike the above research findings) Iceland is included (Ladner, Keuffer & Baldersheim 2015). The aim is twofold: first, to describe the historical development and traditions of Icelandic local self-government, and second, to identify possible explanations for the Icelandic local system’s deviation from the Nordic model
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
