Abstract
This introductory chapter provides the foundation and justification for the book. I present and discuss briefly the mainstream explanation—reform theory—for the enactment of local government amalgamations. The anomalies identified in this conventional explanation are manifest in the theory, methods and evaluation focus of amalgamation studies. The chapter provides an overview of all types of territorial reforms (annexations, incorporations and city-county consolidations) and situates amalgamations as a special case of local boundary change. Several definitions of municipal amalgamations and their key features are advanced. Taking these definitions as the starting point, the chapter provides a background on amalgamation reforms, highlighting the need to consider time, space and human agency in the analysis of territorial reforms in general and municipal amalgamations in particular. The chapter also addresses the complex relationship between size, amalgamations and local government efficiency. I make a preliminary attempt to untangle these effects, before delving into these arguments in more detail in later chapters.
We must use time as a tool, not as a crutch.
—John F. Kennedy
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
The amalgamation reform of Portuguese sub-municipal government units (parishes) is a classic example of a coercive reform since it was agreed upon in the Memorandum of Understanding signed as part of the financial bailout between the Portuguese Government and a triad of international organizations (European Commission, European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund) (Tavares & Teles, 2018). In contrast, the amalgamation reform recently conducted in Norway was initiated by the national government but largely voluntary and respecting the preferences of local actors (Fitjar, 2021).
- 4.
Special purpose governments are also considered a form of boundary change in the United States (Carr, 2004a), but they are excluded from this analysis due to their single-purpose nature. Furthermore, special purpose governments are a mix of several organizational forms, including ‘public authorities’, which resemble European municipally owned corporations and derive their revenues from user fees (Tavares & Camões, 2010, 2023) and ‘special districts’, which are allowed to levy taxes. In addition, some districts exist solely to raise funds by issuing bonds and/or by providing tax increment financing, which clearly distinguishes them from the type of boundary changes discussed in this book. For an in-depth analysis of the special district form, see Foster (1997), Bourdeaux (2005) and Bauroth (2015).
- 5.
Technical efficiency concerns the relationship between inputs and outputs. Allocative efficiency, in turn, refers to an alignment of production with consumer preferences, i.e., when the marginal benefit to the consumers equals the marginal cost of producing an additional unit of a good/service.
- 6.
Economies of scale are decreases in cost per unit of output obtained due to an increase in the scale of operation (typically measured by the amount of output produced). When the cost per unit of output increases with size it means diseconomies of scale have settled in.
- 7.
Economies of density are lower unit costs resulting from spatial proximity of suppliers or providers. Higher population densities allow synergies in service provision leading to cost savings; conversely, unitary costs increase with decreases in density. Utility services, particularly water supply and wastewater management, typically display an association between density and costs (Bel et al., 2010).
- 8.
Economies of scope occur when producing a wider variety of services in tandem is more cost effective for a local government than producing less of a variety, or producing each service independently.
References
Andrews, R. (2015). Vertical consolidation and financial sustainability: Evidence from English local government. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33(6), 1518–1545.
Askim, J., Klausen, J. E., Vabo, S. I., & Bjurstrøm, K. (2016). What causes municipal amalgamation reform? Rational explanations meet Western European experiences, 2004–13. In Local public sector reforms in times of crisis (pp. 59–79). Palgrave Macmillan.
Baldersheim, H., & Rose, L. (Eds.). (2010). Territorial choice: The politics of boundaries and borders. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bartolini, S. (1993). On time and comparative research. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 5, 131–167.
Bauroth, N. (2015). Hide in plain sight: The uneven proliferation of special districts across the United States by size and function. Public Administration Quarterly, 39(2), 295–324.
Bel, G., Fageda, X., & Warner, M. E. (2010). Is private production of public services cheaper than public production? A meta-regression analysis of solid waste and water services. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29(3), 553–577.
Belley, S. (2012). Amalgamation (or Merger). In L. Côté, & J.-F. Savard (Eds.)., Encyclopedic dictionary of public administration. Retrieved January 17, 2018, from www.dictionnaire.enap.ca
Bennett, R. J. (Ed.). (1989). Territory and administration in Europe. Francis Pinter.
Benton, J. E. (2002). Counties as service delivery agents: Changing expectations and roles. Praeger.
Bertrana, X., & Heinhelt, H. (2013). The Second tier of local government in the context of European multi-level government systems: Institutional setting and prospects for reform. Revista Catalana de Dret Public, 46, 73–89.
Bish, R. L. (2001). Local government amalgamations: discredited nineteenth century ideals alive in the twenty-first. Commentary-CD Howe Institute, 150, p. 1.
Bolgherini, S., & Paparo, A. (2023). Process matters: The variegated effects of municipal amalgamation features on voter turnout revealed in a 10-country comparative investigation. European Political Science Review, 1–19.
Bourdeaux, C. (2005). A question of genesis: An analysis of the determinants of public authorities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(3), 441–462.
Brink, A. (2004). The break-up of municipalities: Voting behavior in local referenda. Economics of Governance, 5, 119–135.
Carr, J. B. (2004a). Whose game do we play? Local government boundary change and metropolitan governance. In R. Feiock (Ed.), Metropolitan governance: Conflict, competition, and cooperation (pp. 212–239). Georgetown University Press.
Carr, J. B. (2004b). Perspectives on city-county consolidation and its alternatives. In J. B. Carr & R. C. Feiock (Eds.), City-county consolidation and its alternatives: Reshaping the local government landscape. Armonk, NY.
Castells, M. (1997). The power of identity. Blackwell.
Chirot, D. (1984). Social and historical landscapes of Marc Bloch. In T. Skocpol (Ed.), Vision and method in historical sociology. Conference on methods of historical social analysis (pp. 22–46). Cambridge University Press.
Copus, C. (2006). British local government: A case for a new constitutional settlement. Public Policy and Administration, 21(2), 4–21.
Dahl, R. A., & Tufte, E. R. (1973). Size and democracy. Stanford University Press.
Davies, R. R. (1967). Marc Bloch. History, 52, 265–282.
Denters, B., Goldsmith, M., Ladner, A., Mouritzen, P. E., & Rose, L. E. (2014). Size and local democracy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Diermeier, D., & Krehbiel, K. (2003). Institutionalism as a methodology. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 15(2), 123–144.
Drechsler, W. (2013). Coercive municipal amalgamation today – With illustrations from Estonia. Halduskultuur, 14(1), 158–167.
Drew, J., Kortt, M. A., & Dollery, B. (2016). Did the big stick work? An empirical assessment of scale economies and the Queensland forced amalgamation program. Local Government Studies, 42(1), 1–14.
Erlingsson, G., Mörk, E., & Klarin, J. (2021b). Does size matter? Evidence from municipality break-ups. CESifo Working Papers, 9042, 1–52.
Erlingsson, G. Ó. (2005). Modelling secessions from municipalities. Scandinavian Political Studies, 28(2), 141–159.
Erlingsson, G. Ó., & Ödalen, J. (2013). How should local government be organised? Reflections from a Swedish perspective. Local Government Studies, 39(1), 22–46.
Erlingsson, G. Ó., Ödalen, J., & Wångmar, E. (2015). Understanding large-scale institutional change: Social conflicts and the politics of Swedish municipal amalgamations, 1952–1974. Scandinavian Journal of History, 40(2), 195–214.
Erlingsson, G. Ó., Ödalen, J., & Wångmar, E. (2021a). How coerced municipal amalgamations thwart the values of local self-government. Urban Affairs Review, 57(5), 1226–1251.
Fitjar, R. D. (2021). Unrequited metropolitan mergers: Suburban rejection of cities in the Norwegian municipal reform. Territory, Politics, Governance, 9(1), 17–36.
Foster, K. A. (1997). The political economy of special-purpose government. Georgetown University Press.
Galizzi, G., Rota, S., & Sicilia, M. (2023). Local government amalgamations: State of the art and new ways forward. Public Management Review, 1–23.
Gendźwiłł, A., Kurniewicz, A., & Swianiewicz, P. (2021). The impact of municipal territorial reforms on the economic performance of local governments. A systematic review of quasi-experimental studies. Space and Polity, 25(1), 37–56.
Gordon, N., & Knight, B. (2008). The effects of school district consolidation on educational cost and quality. Public Finance Review, 36(4), 408–430.
Gregg, D. A. (2001). Amalgamation of British Columbia school districts: A study of leadership. Pepperdine University.
John, P. (2001). Local governance in Western Europe. Sage.
Katznelson, I., & Weingast, B. R. (2005). Intersections between historical and rational choice institutionalism. Preferences and Situations, 1–26.
Keating, M. (2008). Thirty years of territorial politics. West European Politics, 31(1-2), 60–81.
King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton University Press.
Kjellberg, F. (1985). Local government reorganization and the development of the welfare state. Journal of Public Policy, 5(2), 215–239.
Kjellberg, F. (1988). Local government and the welfare state: Reorganization in Scandinavia. In B. Dente & F. Kjellberg (Eds.), The dynamics of institutional change: Local government reorganization in western democracies. Sage.
Kjellberg, F. (1995). The changing values of local government. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 540(1), 40–50.
Knight, J. (1992). Institutions and social conflict. Cambridge University Press.
Kreuzer, M. (2023). The grammar of time: A toolbox for comparative historical analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Lithopoulos, S. (2015). A literature review on the amalgamation of police services in Canada. Public Safety Canada = Sécurité publique Canada. Research report 20415-R014.
Łukomska, J. (2021). Striving for a restitution of the former splendor? Reasons for municipal splits in Poland. Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development, 25(1), 71–81.
Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2009). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge University Press.
Matějová, L., Nemec, J., Křápek, M., & Klimovský, D. (2017). Economies of scale on the municipal level: Fact or fiction in the Czech Republic? NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 10(1), 39–59.
McCoppin, B., & Birrell, C. (1996). Primary Health Care under pressure: A case study of amalgamation in Victoria. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 2(3), 38–48.
Mouritzen, P. E. (1989). City size and citizens’ satisfaction: Two competing theories revisited. European Journal of Political Research, 17(6), 661–688.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
Oakerson, R. J., & Parks, R. B. (1988). Citizen voice and public entrepreneurship: The organizational dynamic of a complex metropolitan county. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 18(4), 91–112.
Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton University Press.
Pierson, P., & Skocpol, T. (2002). Historical institutionalism in contemporary political science. Political Science: The State of the Discipline, 3(1), 1–32.
Ruggiero, P., Monfardini, P., & Mussari, R. (2012). Territorial boundaries as limits: A Foucauldian analysis of the agglomeration of municipalities. International Journal of Public Administration, 35(7), 492–506.
Spáč, P. (2021). Reversing the Past. Municipal Splits in Slovakia After 1989. Miscellanea Geographica, 25(1), 28–36.
Stănuș, C. (2021). Territorial fragmentation in post-communist Romania: The not so curious case of a de-amalgamation reform. Miscellanea Geographica, 25(1), 62–70.
Swianiewicz, P. (2014). An empirical typology of local government systems in Eastern Europe. Local Government Studies, 40(2), 292–311.
Swianiewicz, P. (2021). From post-communist democratic laissez-faire to prevention of territorial fragmentation: Tightening the rules of municipal splits in Central and Eastern Europe after 1990. Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development, 25(1), 5–17.
Tavares, A. F. (2018). Municipal amalgamations and their effects: A literature review. Miscellanea Geographica, 22(1), 5–15.
Tavares, A. F., & Camões, P. J. (2010). New forms of local governance: A theoretical and empirical analysis of municipal corporations in Portugal. Public Management Review, 12(5), 587–608.
Tavares, A. F., & Camões, P. J. (2023). Municipal corporatisation in Portugal: From mania to depression. In Corporatisation in local government: Context, evidence and perspectives from 19 countries (pp. 315–333). Springer International Publishing.
Tavares, A. F., & Feiock, R. C. (2018). Applying an institutional collective action framework to investigate intermunicipal cooperation in Europe. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(4), 299–316.
Tavares, A. F., & Teles, F. (2018). Deeply rooted but still striving for a role: The Portuguese freguesias under reform. In Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe (pp. 193–209). Palgrave Macmillan.
Teles, F. (2016). Local governance and inter-municipal cooperation. Palgrave Macmillan.
Wollmann, H. (2000). Local government modernization in Germany: Between incrementalism and reform waves. Public administration, 78(4), 915–936.
Wollmann, H. (2004). The two waves of territorial reforms of local governments in Germany. In J. Meligrana (Ed.), The re-drawing local government boundaries: An international study of politics, procedures and decisions. UBC Press.
Yologlu, A. C. (2018). Politics of municipal consolidation: The case of Denizli. SAGE Open, 8(2), 2158244018768669.
Zimmerbauer, K., & Paasi, A. (2013). When old and new regionalism collide: Deinstitutionalization of regions and resistance identity in municipality amalgamations. Journal of Rural Studies, 30, 31–40.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tavares, A. (2024). Territorial Reforms: Concepts and Cases of Boundary Change. In: Municipal Amalgamation Reforms. Palgrave Studies in Sub-National Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54736-2_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54736-2_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-54735-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-54736-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)