The legitimacy of sub-municipal councils in small and mid-sized cities under post-socialist conditions

• Autorzy: Jan Buček , Mária Frassová

Abstrakty

EN

Sub-municipal spatial community-based bodies, represented in the form of councils, have important roles in urban governance in many countries. This paper attempts to contribute to a better understanding of the legitimacy of sub-municipal councils (SMCs) in the specific conditions of small and mid-sized cities, within the context of democratising post-socialist society and decentralising government. Using the questionnaire and additional local resources, we discuss a selected set of relevant components of the legitimacy of SMCs, such as the traditions of their existence, legal and democratic grounds, autonomy, personal qualities, expertise, procedural issues, results and stability. We document these issues pertaining to the case of SMCs in small and medium-sized cities in Slovakia, emphasising the need for more components of legitimacy for their stable existence, with the strong impact of local traditions, legal framework development and incorporation into local representative democracy bodies.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

legitimacy; sub-municipal councils; community; governance; post-socialist cities

• Wydawca: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Czasopismo: Quaestiones Geographicae
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: 42
• Numer: 2
• Strony: 37-51

Daty

wydano

2023

Twórcy

autor

Jan Buček

• Comenius University Bratislava

autor

Mária Frassová

• Comenius University Bratislava

Bibliografia

• Act No 13/1954 Coll. on national councils (in Slovak).
• Act No 69/1967 Coll. on national councils (in Slovak).
• Act No 27/1972 Coll. on national councils (Act No 69/1967 as amended, in Slovak).
• Act No 346/1990 Coll. on election to local self-government (in Slovak).
• Act No 369/1990 Coll. on local self-government (in Slovak).
• Act No 453/2001 Coll. on local self-government (Act 369/1990 as amended, in Slovak).
• Ashforth B.E., Gibbs B.W., 1990. The double-edge of organisational legitimation. Organization Science 1(2): 177–194.
• Bailey N., Pill M., 2011. The continuing popularity of the neighbourhood and neighbourhood governance in the transition from the ‘big state’ to the ‘big society’ paradigm. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 29(5): 927–942.
• Beetham D., 1991. Max Weber and the legitimacy of the modern state. Analyse and Kritik 13(1): 34–45.
• Beetham D., 2013. The legitimation of power. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
• Bénit-Gbaffou C., Katsaura O., 2014. Community leadership and the construction of political legitimacy: Unpacking Bourdieu’s ‘Political Capital’ in post-apartheid Johannesburg. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38(5): 807–1832.
• Buček J., 2000. Sublocal decentralisation – The case of Slovak big cities. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 18(1): 57–78.
• Cashore B., 2002. Legitimacy and the privatisation of environmental governance: How non–state market–driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule–making authority. Governance 15(4): 503–529.
• City Charters, 2021. Cities – Banská Bystrica, Dolný Kubín, Martin, Nitra, Trnava, Prešov, Rimavská Sobota, Trenčín, Vranov, Žilina (as valid in 2016). Online: Official web pages of local self-governments (accessed 17 October 2021).
• Clark G.L., 1984. A theory of local autonomy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 74(2): 195–208.
• Clarke N., Cochrane A., 2013. Geographies and politics of localism: The localism of the United Kingdom’s coalition government. Political Geography 34: 10–23.
• Collins T., 2016. Urban civic pride and the new localism. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 41(2): 175–186.
• Connelly S., 2011. Constructing legitimacy in the new community governance. Urban Studies 48(5): 929–946.
• Deephouse D.L., Suchman M., 2008. Legitimacy in organisational institutionalism. In: Greenwood R., Oliver C., Sahlin K., Suddaby R. (eds), The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. Sage, London: 49–77.
• Doberstein C., 2013. Metagovernance of urban governance networks in Canada: In pursuit of legitimacy and accountability. Canadian Public Administration 56(4): 584–609.
• Doberstein C., Millar H., 2014. Balancing a house of cards: Throughput legitimacy in Canadian governance networks. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique 47(2): 259–280.
• Duncan T., 1990. Community councils in Glasgow – The development of an urban grass-roots democracy. Local Government Studies 16(2): 8–16.
• Fraser J., Bazuin J.T., Hornberger G., 2016. The privatisation of neighbourhood governance and the production of urban space. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 48(5): 844–870.
• Geodetic and Cartographic Institute, 2021. ZBGIS map client – Base map. Online: https://zbgis.skgeodesy.sk/mkzbgis/sk/ (accessed 4 January 2021).
• Godfrey C., 2007. Making a difference – The role of parish councils in Milton Keynes. Local Economy 22(3): 293–297.
• Haček M., Grabner A., 2013. Local sub-decentralization and sub-municipal divisions in Slovenia. Croatian and Comparative Public Administration 13(1): 213–230.
• Häikiö L., 2007. Expertise, representation and the common good: Grounds for legitimacy in the urban governance network. Urban Studies 44(11): 2147–2162.
• Hlepas N.K., Kersting N., Kuhlmann S., Swianiewicz P., Teles F. (eds), 2018. Sub-municipal governance in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
• Huxley K., Andrews R., Downe J., Guarneros-Meza V., 2016. Administrative traditions and citizen participation in public policy: A comparative study of France, Germany, the UK and Norway. Policy and Politics 44(3): 383–402.
• Jeffrey B., 1997. Creating participatory structures in local government. Local Government Policy Making 23: 25–31.
• Johnson C., Dowd T.J., Ridgeway C.L., 2006. Legitimacy as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology 32: 53–78.
• Kearns A., 1995. Active citizenship and local governance: Political and geographical dimensions. Political Geography 14(2): 155–175.
• Klarić M., 2022. Development of sub-municipal government in South-Eastern European countries. Pravni vjesnik 38(1): 93–112.
• Klausen J.E., Sweeting D., 2004. Legitimacy and community involvement in local governance. In: Haus M., Heinelt H., Stewart M. (eds), Urban governance and democracy. Routledge, London: 224–243.
• Ladner A., Keuffer N., Baldersheim H., Hlepas N., Swianiewicz P., Steyvers K., Navarro C., 2019. Patterns of local autonomy in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
• Levi M., Sacks A., Tyler T., 2009. Conceptualising legitimacy, measuring legitimating beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist 53(3): 354–375.
• Liberatore A., Funtowicz S., 2003. Democratising expertise, expertising democracy: What does this mean, and why bother? Science and Public Policy 30(3): 146–150.
• Liebmann G.W., 1995. The little platoons: Sub-local governments in modern history. Praeger, London.
• Lowndes V., Sullivan H., 2008. How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood governance. Public Administration 86(1): 53–74.
• Lysek J., 2018. The “Little Town-Halls” in the Czech Republic: An unexploited potential of functional decentralization. In: Hlepas N.K., Kersting N., Kuhlmann S., Swianiewicz P., Teles F. (eds), Sub-municipal governance in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham: 41–68.
• Matheson C., 1987. Weber and the classification of forms of legitimacy. British Journal of Sociology 38(2): 199–215.
• Molden O., Abrams J., Davis E.J., Moseley C., 2017. Beyond localism: The micropolitics of local legitimacy in a community-based organisation. Journal of Rural Studies 50: 60–69.
• Pratchett L., 2004. Local autonomy, local democracy and the ‘new localism’. Political Studies 52(2): 358–375.
• Purdue D., 2001. Neighbourhood governance: Leadership, trust and social capital. Urban Studies 38(12): 2211–2224.
• Scharpf F.W., 1999. Governing in Europe: Effective and democratic? Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Schmidt V.A., 2013. Democracy and legitimacy in the European Union revisited: Input, output and ‘throughput’. Political Studies 61(1): 2–22.
• Schmidt V.A., Wood M., 2019. Conceptualising throughput legitimacy: Procedural mechanisms of accountability, transparency, inclusiveness and openness in EU governance. Public Administration 97(4): 727–740.
• Schmitter P.C., 2006. Governance in the European Union: A viable mechanism for future legitimation? In: Benz A., Papadopoulos Z. (eds), Governance and democracy. Routledge, London: 158–176.
• Silbey S.S., 2005. Everyday life and the constitution of legality. In: Jacobs M.D., Hanrahan N.W. (eds), The Blackwell companion to the sociology of culture. Blackwell, Malden: 332–345.
• Sintomer Y., De Maillard J., 2007. The limits to local participation and deliberation in the French ‘politique de la ville’. European Journal of Political Research 46(4): 503–529.
• Slavík V., 1986. Process of communities’ integration and the settlement structure in Western Slovakia region 1950–1980 (in Slovak). Acta Facultatis Rerum Naturalis Universitatis Comenianae Geographica 25: 19–34.
• Slovak National Council, 1983. Report of the Government of the Slovak Socialist Republic on the activity of National Councils after the 14th Congress of the Czechoslovak Communist Party (in Slovak). Online: http://www.psp.cz/eknih/1981snr/tisky/t0063_01.htm (accessed 14 May 2019).
• Smith D.M., Blanc M., 1997. Grass-roots democracy and participation: A new analytical and practical approach. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 15(3): 281–303.
• Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic, 2003. Historical Lexicon of Municipalities in Slovak Republic 1970-2001 (in Slovak). Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava.
• Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic, 2014. Statistical Lexicon of Municipalities in Slovak Republic 2011 (in Slovak). Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava.
• Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic, 2021. Demographic and social statistics. Online: datacube.statistics.sk (accessed 30 September 2021).
• Steffek J., 2019. The limits of proceduralism: Critical remarks on the rise of ‘throughput legitimacy’. Public Administration 97(4): 784–796.
• Stillman P.G., 1974. The concept of legitimacy. Polity 7(1): 32–56.
• Stolzenberg P., Getimis P., 2016. Fiscal consolidation in German and Greek municipalities: The interplay of leadership and legitimacy. Lex Localis-Journal of Local Self-Government 14(4): 893–916.
• Strebel M.A., Kübler D., Marcinkowski F., 2019. The importance of input and output legitimacy in democratic governance: Evidence from a population-based survey experiment in four West European countries. European Journal of Political Research 58(2): 488–513.
• Submunicipal Councils Meeting Minutes, 2016–2018. Cities: Banská Bystrica, Dolný Kubín, Martin, Nitra, Rimavská Sobota, Trenčín, Trnava, Vranov, Žilina (in Slovak). Online: official web pages of local self-governments (accessed 17 October 2021).
• Suchman M.C., 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review 20(3): 571–610.
• Swianiewicz P., 2014. Intra-municipal units in urban political systems in Poland: Vicious roundabout of marginalization or dead-end street? The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy 7(2): 173–198.
• Swianiewicz P., 2018. New experiments of maintenance of old traditions? Dual system of sub-municipal units in Poland. In: Hlepas N.K., Kersting N., Kuhlmann S., Swianiewicz P., Teles F. (eds), Sub-municipal governance in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham: 167–192.
• Weatherford M.S., 1992. Measuring political legitimacy. American Political Science Review 86(1): 149–166.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14746/quageo-2023-0014

Biblioteka Nauki

52496862