![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Although existing literature on central–local governance includes comprehensive studies on how constitutional and financial frameworks regulate local government autonomy, this study seeks explanations for the introduction or absence of central coercion within these frameworks. The analysis studies six processes of policy instrument choice with different outcomes in Norway, Denmark and Sweden in the field of refugee settlement. It finds that a uniform perception of crisis and political compromises make political parties abandon their political–ideological standpoints relating to central–local governance. Additionally, the success and failure of political strategies of obfuscation and of dividing the opposition help to explain the different outcomes. The study reveals differences in the political salience of central–local governance in three countries that have systematically been categorised in the same groups in central–local studies. Consequently, more studies on how and why local autonomy is regulated within national frameworks are necessary to understand the actual autonomy that local governments enjoy.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. Thanks also to Jostein Askim, Anton Steen and participants in workshops at NORKOM 2016 and ‘Nasjonal fagkonferanse i statsvitenskap 2017ʹ for comments on earlier drafts.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. The distribution of responses comprised 3 central actors, 18 organisations and 3 municipal actors. The municipal response to the Danish hearing was significantly lower than in the Norwegian and Swedish hearings. However, Denmark does not normally request that all or parts of the municipal community respond (although the hearings are open to all of them), as is the case in Norway and Sweden.
2. Although the parliamentary negotiations included a rhetorical emphasis on how voluntary agreements between the municipalities should first be tested, the coercive elements in the legislation remained the same.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Vilde Hernes
Vilde Hernes is a PhD fellow at the Department of Political Science at the University of Oslo. Her research and teaching cover central–local government relationships, public policy and design, organisational theory and immigrant integration.