Understanding localism

Abstract

These two special issues of Policy Studies investigate various aspects of localism and draw insights from a broad range of different academic disciplines; which illustrates how ubiquitous the issue has become, both in the academy and in political discourse, particularly in the UK and increasingly in Australia. In this introduction, we begin by outlining three different types of localism – managerial, representative and community – which have underpinned both debates in the area and policy developments, before outlining our definition of the term. Subsequently, we introduce the theoretical and empirical contributions that this issue makes to understanding localism in Westminster-style democracies.

Notes on contributors

Mark Evans is Director and Professor of Governance at the ANZSOG Institute for Governance, University of Canberra.

David Marsh is Professor of Governance at the ANZSOG Institute for Governance, University of Canberra.

Gerry Stoker is Director and Professor of Governance at the Centre for Citizenship, Globalisation and Governance at the University of Southampton.

Notes

1. Stoker (2011) has argued that this managerialism limited New Labour from ever in practice really developing a localist agenda that had any political bite.

2. The coalition government argued (HM Government 2010b, 4) that, under the Labour Government: ‘Record levels of spending were channelled through the most sophisticated system of state control in Britain's history. Elaborate mechanisms of audit, inspection, targets and guidance enabled the centre to micromanage the public sphere to an unprecedented degree. This may have been done with the best of intentions, but it failed’.

3. This is an assertion which has been heavily criticised, particularly by those who argue that citizens are not apathetic or unengaged, rather they are alienated from mainstream, ‘political’, organisations, but increasingly engaged in new forms of political participation, some, but not all, of which have a crucial local dimension (Norris 2002; Bang 2009, 2011; Marsh, O'Toole, and Jones 2007).

4. The NLGN's Localist Manifesto suggests radical reforms to establish greater localism, including legislation to increase devolution, weakening power (breaking) central government departments, reforming local government to create combined local authorities with greater coordination between them and making voting compulsory.

5. We would like to acknowledge the generous financial support of the Murray Darling Basin Futures Collaborative Research Network which allowed for the completion of this work.