IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ays/ispwps/paper1003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is Decentralization "Glue" or "Solvent" for National Unity?

Author

Listed:

Abstract

The last two centuries have seen the rise of the nation-state as the dominant political institution around the world. During this period, the colonial empires of varying duration and reach created first by the Portuguese, Spanish, and Dutch, then the French and British, then the Germans and Italians, and finally the Russians and Americans crumbled and were replaced by independent nation-states. However, “state” and “nation” are not always equivalent. In a surprising number of countries, as we discuss later in this paper, autonomist and secessionist movements of varying strength and character remain active. The broad question we consider in this paper is whether decentralization is likely to hurt or help national unity in these “countries at risk.”

Suggested Citation

  • Richard M. Bird & François Vaillancourt & Édison Roy-César, 2010. "Is Decentralization "Glue" or "Solvent" for National Unity?," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1003, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    • Handle: RePEc:ays:ispwps:paper1003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://icepp.gsu.edu/files/2015/03/ispwp1003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard M. Bird, 2011. "Subnational Taxation In Developing Countries: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of International Commerce, Economics and Policy (JICEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(01), pages 139-161.
    2. Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Santiago Lago-Peñas & Agnese Sacchi, 2017. "The Impact Of Fiscal Decentralization: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1095-1129, September.
    3. Robert D. Ebel, 2018. "Intergovernmental Revenue Assignment and Mobilization Principles and Applications for Somalia," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1814, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Decentralization; National Unity; Spain; Germany;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ays:ispwps:paper1003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Paul Benson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ispgsus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.