How Coerced Municipal Amalgamations Thwart the Values of Local Self-Government

Gissur Ó Erlingsson,Erik Wångmar,Jörgen Ödalen

doi:10.1177/1078087420921458

Gissur Ó Erlingsson, Erik Wångmar + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087420921458

Copy DOI

Abstract

Arguments invoking increased functional efficiency have had a profound impact on local government reforms in advanced democracies during the past 60 years. Consequently, most mature democracies have implemented municipal amalgamation reforms, often through top-down coercion. In this article, we demonstrate how far central governments have been willing to go, in terms of coercion, by providing an in-depth historical account of Swedish municipal amalgamations between 1952 and 1974. Debates on amalgamation reforms have typically revolved around pros and cons of mergers. But very few discussions have addressed the more fundamental moral problem of enforcing amalgamations through coercion. Often, large-scale mergers are carried through against the expressed will of municipalities who wish to remain self-governing. In this article, we present a normative defense of strong local self-government, based partly on values of individual autonomy, and partly on group-based human rights, and we show how coerced amalgamations are at odds with these values.

Highlights

The issue of local government reform is currently, or has recently been, on the agenda in many developed democracies
Thereafter, we present a grouprights-based argument for local autonomy according to which the exercise of local control is a strong moral priority of local groups that should be protected as a right
In our previous work (Erlingsson and Ödalen 2013, 2017), we have argued that there are good reasons to be concerned when considerations of functional efficiency come to overshadow other values, in particular, values associated with the right to local self-determination

Summary

Introduction

The issue of local government reform is currently, or has recently been, on the agenda in many developed democracies. Thereafter, we present a grouprights-based argument for local autonomy according to which the exercise of local control is a strong moral priority of local groups that should be protected as a right. That a necessary condition for implementing amalgamation reforms was to neglect the outspoken wishes of municipalities to avoid amalgamations, and that the central government had no problems overriding principles of local autonomy and self-determination. We highlight some recent empirical research which seriously questions whether the alleged economic rationales for amalgamations are realized This is important because expediential economies of scales-arguments could, if valid, potentially provide a rationale for abating our strong claims that local selfgovernment is a human right. As we shall see, several contemporary studies cast doubt on how convincing the economies of scales-argument really is

A Brief History of Amalgamation Reforms

Findings

Conclusion