The “Little Town-Halls” in the Czech Republic: An Unexploited Potential of Functional Decentralization

  • Jakub Lysek
Part of the Governance and Public Management book series (GPM)


The aim of this chapter is to analyze the function of sub-municipal units (SMUs) and to identify the drivers or initiators of the creation of SMUs and the role SMUs play in terms of representative democracy and multilevel governance in the Czech Republic. The study addresses the following issues: How often do Czech statutory cities decide to organize sub-municipal councils? What is the role of the SMUs in the provision of local government functions? What is the level of citizens’ interest in the SMUs? The chapter concludes with a discussion on whether the SMUs could be the appropriate instrument, partially counterbalancing the negative effects of the Czech fragmented municipal structure.


  1. Bäck, H., Gjelstrup, G., Helgesen, M., Johansson, F., & Erlig, J. K. (2005). Urban Political Decentralisation: Six Scandinavian Cities. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bačlija, I., & Brezovsek, M. (2006). City Quarter Communities: A new quality in Slovenian Local Democracy. In A. Rosenbaum & J. Nemec (Eds.), Democratic Governance in the Central and Eastern European Countries: Challenges and Responses for the XXI Century. Bratislava: NISPAcee.Google Scholar
  3. Bačlija, I., & Haček, M. (2009). Political Perception of Urban Sub-Local Entities. A Comparison of Studies from Ljubljana and Swedish Cities. Khamasin: Journal of American University in Cairo, 3, 34–47.Google Scholar
  4. Dahl, R. A., & Tufte, E. R. (1973). Size and Democracy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press..Google Scholar
  5. Denters, B. (2002). Size and Political Trust: Evidence from Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and United Kingdom. Government & Policy C: Environment and Planning, 20(6), 793–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Exner, J. (2004). Obce, města, městské části: o místní veřejné správě a její dekoncentraci statutárními vyhláškami v územně členěných městech. 1. vyd. Praha: Lipri.Google Scholar
  7. Heath, A., McLean, I., Taylor, B., & Curtice, J. (1999). Between First and Second Order: A Comparison of Voting Behaviour in European and Local Elections in Britain. European Journal of Political Research, 35, 389.Google Scholar
  8. Heinelt, H., & Hlepas, N. K. (2006). Typologies of Local Government Systems. In H. Bäck, H. Heinelt, & A. Magnier (Eds.), The European Mayor: Political Leaders in the Changing Context of Local Democracy (pp. 21–42). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag for Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hledíková, Z., Janák, J., & Dobeš, J. (2005). Dějiny správy v českých zemích od počátků státůpo současnost. Praha: Lidové noviny.Google Scholar
  10. Illner, M. (2003a). The Czech Republic 1990–2001: Successful Reform at the Municipal Level and a Difficult Birth of the Intermediary Government. In H. Baldersheim, M. Illner, & H. Wollman (Eds.), Local Democracy in Post-Communist Europe (pp. 61–90). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Illner, M. (2003b). Thirteen Years of Reforming Sub-national Government in the Czech Republic. In N. Kersting & A. Vetter (Eds.), Reforming Local Government in Europe Closing the Gap between Democracy and Efficiency (pp. 261–282). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Illner, M. (2010). The Czech Republic: Local Government in the Years after the Reform. In F. Hendriks, A. Lidström, & J. Loughlin (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Local and Regional Democracy in Europe (pp. 505–527). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Kersting, N., Caulfield, J., Nickson, A., Olowu, D., & Wollmann, H. (2009). Local Governance Reform in Global Perspective. In Urban and Regional Research International. Wiesbaden: VS -Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Kersting, N., & Vetter, A. (Eds.). (2003). Reforming Local Government in Europe Closing the Gap between Democracy and Efficiency. Wiesbaden: VS -Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Kostelecký, T., Patočková, V., & Illner, M. (2012). Problem Residential Neighbourhoods and Policies Aimed at Their Regeneration in the Post-socialist City: A Case Study of Prague. Czech Sociological Review, 48(1), 39–63.Google Scholar
  16. Lacina, K., & Vajdová, Z. (2000). Local Government in the Czech Republic. In T. M. Horvath (Ed.), Decentralization: Experiments and Reforms. Budapest: Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative.Google Scholar
  17. Lebeda, T. (2009). Komunální volby klamou. Krátké zastavení nad problematickými aspekty volebního systému pro obecní zastupitelstva. Acta Politologica, 1(3), 332–343.Google Scholar
  18. Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000). Political Trust and Trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 475–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lowndes, V., & Sullivan, H. (2008). How Low Can you Go? Rationales and Challenges for Neighbourhood Governance. Public Administration, 86(1), 5–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lysek, J. (2016). Tackling Bureaucracy Growth in Time of Crisis: The Case of Czech Statutory Cities. Lex Localis, 14(4), 783–806.Google Scholar
  21. Ryšavý, D., & Bernard, J. (2013). Size and Local Democracy: The Case of Czech Municipal Representatives. Local Government Studies, 39(6), 833–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ryšavý, D., & Šaradín, P. (2011). Zastupitelé českých měst a obcí v evropské perspektivě. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství (SLON). Google Scholar
  23. Šaradín, P. (2008). Teorie voleb druhého řádu a možnosti jejich aplikace v České republice. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci.Google Scholar
  24. Schmid, H. (2001). Neighborhood Self-Management: Experiments in Civil Society. New York: Springer US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith, M. L. (2007). Direct Democracy in Practice. Prague: Institute for Social and Economic Analysis and Institute of Sociology AS CR.Google Scholar
  26. Smith, G. (2009). Democratic Innovations. Designing Institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Štainer, M., Vrábliková, I., and P. Šaradín. (2011). Analýza výkonu agend přenesené působnosti v podmínkách statutárního města Pardubice. Municipal document.Google Scholar
  28. Šťastná, L., and M. Gregor. (2011). Local Government Efficiency: Evidence from the Czech Municipalities (IES Working Paper IES FSV, 2011/14). Prague: Charles University in Prague.Google Scholar
  29. Steiner, R., Kaiser, C., & Eythórsson, G. T. (2016). A Comparative Analysis of Amalgamation Reforms in Selected European Countries. In S. Kuhlmann & G. Bouckaert (Eds.), Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis National Trajectories and International Comparisons (pp. 23–42). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Swianiewicz, P. (Ed.). (2002). Consolidation or Fragmentation? The Size of Local Governments in Central and Eastern Europe. Budapest: LGI—Open Society Institute.Google Scholar
  31. Swianiewicz, P. (2010). If Territorial Fragmentation is a Problem, is Amalgamation a Solution? An East European Perspective. Local Government Studies, 36(2), 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Swianiewicz, P. (2014). Intra-Municipal Units in Urban Political Systems in Poland: Vicious Roundabout of Marginalization or Dead-End Street? NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 7(2), 173–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tavares, A. F., & Rodrigues, M. (2015). The Economic and Political Impacts of Top-Down Territorial Reforms: The Case of Sub-City Governments. Local Government Studies, 41(6), 956–976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Asche, D., & Dierickx, G. (2007). The Decentralization of City Governments and the Restoration of Political Trust. Local Government Studies, 33(1), 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Ostaaijen, J., Gianoli, A., & Coulson, A. (2012). The Added Value of Intra-Municipal Decentralization: Comparing Bologna, Rotterdam and Birmingham. In L. Schaap & H. Daemen (Eds.), Renewal in European Local Democracies (pp. 145–164). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


  1. Act no. 128/2000 Coll., On municipalities in other words, the municipal system.Google Scholar
  2. Act no. 250/2000 Coll., Act on the Local Self-government Budgets.Google Scholar
  3. Act no. 312/2002 Coll: On Local Government Officials.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jakub Lysek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political Science and European StudiesPalacký UniversityOlomoucCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations