Download V. Hroisman STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL ROLE OF

V. Hroisman
STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL ROLE OF DECENTRALIZATION
OF POWER IN THE PROCESSES OF CIVIL SOCIETY
ESTABLISHMENT
The current stage of socio-economic and political development of Ukraine,
the appropriate transformation and modernization processes that accompany its
system of public administration, require conceptual and practical viewing of
established patterns of state and civil society institutions relationships. The
introduction of democratic mechanisms of citizens’ interaction with public and
local authorities is a functional tool for anthropocentrism implementation and
public policy effectiveness, which is the basis of human interests. Today, the
establishment and development of civil society in Ukraine is restrained yet by not
authoritative enough and not sufficiently deployed local government. Although the
origins of the tradition of self-government in Ukraine date back to Kievan Russia,
are guaranteed by the Constitution, the Law of Ukraine "On Local Government"
and are ratified by the Parliament of the European Charter of Local SelfGovernment, its functionality can be spoken about only conditionally. The state
firmly holds the powers and still it’s difficult to overcome its decisive influence on
the self-government.
Some issues of decentralization of power in the processes of civil society
establishment were discussed in the writings of such scholars as: G. Atamanchuk,
I. Vasilenko, Yu. Kozlov, V. Knorrynh, B. Kurashvili, B. Lazarev, V. Manohin, I.
Panova, V. Patrushev, A. Pykulkin, B. Rosenfeld, V. Sorokin, Yu. Starylov,
Yu.Tikhomirov, M.Studenikina, N. Hamanieva, A. Shergin, V. Yusupov, D.
Black, G. Breban, J. Wedel, M. Weber, J. Wilson, D. Garner, H. Kunz,
C.O'Donnell, T. Parsonos, J. Straussmen and others.
Decentralization of power is a synthetic concept that characterizes the triad
city - state - society in their organic unity, and here it is crucial in what way it
affects the civil society establishment as a special type of social organization,
which is solely to "guard" the interests of their community. Historically, the
development of civil society is associated with the emergence of so-called "urban
civilization" which led "the state to the formation of organized society, which was
formed with free and personally independent citizens who are masters of their own
fate" [1]. The more state influenced the society, introduced relevant regulations,
the more power was centralized, and therefore the more declarative were impulses
for the development of civil society. Therefore, decentralization of power,
traditionally designed to make self-sufficient society where each member has the
opportunity to realize their own interests and needs. In order to not impede the
implementation of earlier mentioned interests the state should "out-center" some of
its public functions to a society, and it in turn should create appropriate institutions
to guarantee their sustainability and efficiency of operation.
Therefore, the "essence of citizen" and the potential of civil society are
determined according to the government - centralized or decentralized. On the
other hand, the more formed is civil society, and the more it presses the institutions
of public administration, the more the state "out-center" it its functions. If we
proceed from the fact that the state is determined by its organic connection with
"social community", it directly indicates that the features state reserves are those
provided to it by the society. According to most classical theories of civil society,
"the state is derived from the value of social communities, people rally together to
jointly participate in the creation of the State" [2]. This aspect largely points to the
asymmetry in understanding the place of decentralization of power in the process
of civil society establishment. However, such an approach as a kind of
methodological design has the right to exist if decentralization of power promotes
common interests of communities and their cohesion, to use the terminology of
Max Weber, becoming a "target alliance", "set by people at a reasonable manner
for the sake of their natural rights and implementation of coordinated interest" [3].
The founder of the term "decentralization" A. de Tocqueville,
methodologically defining its place in the processes of civil society establishment,
noted that it "has not only an administrative value, but also a civic dimension, as
activity increases the possibility of citizens interested in public affairs, which in its
turn, allow them to join the exercise of freedom ... and accumulation of these local,
active "folding" freedom comes the most effective counterweight to the centralized
government, even if he finds support in the impersonal collective will" [4]. Experts
of the UN in distributing decentralized trends in the various national systems of
public administration see the objective factor which, on the one hand, depends on
the level of public consciousness and identity, on the other - provides partnerships
between public authorities and self-organized communities. In their view, "the
implementation of various forms of decentralized programs in countries,
sustainable development is a trend that is associated with the growing interest in
the role of civil society and the private sector as a partner for governments that are
searching for new ways to service citizens" [5]. Therefore, experts emphasize on
the decentralization of functional factors that determine the importance of its place
in the development of civil society.
In his general methodological considerations F. Fukuyama comes from the
fact that "decentralization of power and strengthening trends of local government
strengthening is a form of return of confidence in government institutions and the
decline of centralized regimes and separatist movements in the modern world" [6].
This step to "increase accountability and control over their own destiny" is a sign
of "effective participation" of communities in the formation and implementation of
local government.
Identifying the place of decentralization of power in the processes of civil
society establishment it is necessary to draw attention to the fact that it is a form of
fixation process of separation of society and state. The main detonator of
decentralization of power is civil society, it gets new opportunities to realize their
potential in the political sphere. Thus the total decentralization of power
characterizes the limitation of traditional state functions, most of it is just to be on
the guard of national interests, the rest goes to other self-organizing structures of
civil society. This opinion was relevant even for A. de Tocqueville, who argued
that only "in aristocratic society where institutional foundations of civil society
were not formed enough, the state directly controls its citizens, then it has to
defend their national interests (for example in the war), in most other cases the
state must guarantee maximum freedom for its citizens" [4]. Famous Italian
explorer
G.
Ottimo,
evaluating the
functionality
and
effectiveness
of
decentralization of power for civil society development within the respective
national systems of public administration, sees in it a mean of strengthening the
competitive position of the state as it re-focuses its institutional interests to the
interests of the community. Because the "decentralization of power, traditionally
providing the speed and mobility of a set of organizational principles aimed at
meeting the needs of citizens, it leads to the establishment of hierarchical structures
among citizens that give them some momentum for the effectiveness of their own
activities" [7]. Decentralization of power in this respect is focused on maximum
protection of the interests of the community and rapid response to changing
interests and the emergence of new needs.
Decentralization of power occupies a strategic place in ensuring the
functioning of public administration, which main criterion of effectiveness is the
realization of interests and needs of the community. Accordingly it "represents a
model of management, which allows to make difficult and operational decisions, a
request to which is given by the society" [8]. Thus the scientist H. Apel considers
the decentralization of power as an important tool for expanding freedom of the
community, thereby leading to increase its activity in decision-making and
implementation.
While substantiating the strategy of decentralization of power in the
processes of civil society establishment it is also advisable to focus on the basic
principles of delegation, which is the basis of its structural and functional
implementation. The essence of these principles comes down to: 1) the
transference of authorities from the center to the region has always to be done
according to the expectations of the community, and for this it must have a
sufficient volume of powers to influence the relevant political and administrative
institutions [9]; 2) the transference of authorities should be done in such a way that
every subject of political and administrative management in the region, at the same
time understood their responsibility either to authorized bodies or to the
community, whose interests they are intended to represent.
The place of decentralization of power in the processes of civil society
establishment can be analyzed through appropriate political and administrative
factors that ensure its revitalization. These factors need to enroll:
- intensification of political participation of citizens (local and regional
authorities provide citizens the capacity to participate in political life, which in turn
helps to build more educated and informed citizens) [10];
- to maximize the "accountability" of government: local and regional
political and administrative institutions traditionally are closer to citizens, thus they
are better able to respond to their needs, which in turn legitimizes the democratic
accountability of the state to society and to verify that the government is not only
acting in the national interest but in the interest of a particular regional community
[11];
– strengthening the legitimacy of the government: physical distancing of
citizens from central authorities is resulted in an assessment of their decisions, as
far as decisions made on the middle and grassroots levels sometimes seem more
legitimate [9];
– protection of democratic freedoms hinders attacks of the central
government on the rights and freedoms of the individual, on this basis only
decentralized government can protect its citizens, because the separation of powers
"vertically" crushing the monolith of state power, establishes a system of "checks
and balances", and then centralization hampers anti-democratic decision-peripheral
political authorities.
Based on the fact that in the democratic organization of public power states
are divided into decentralized and relatively decentralized, due to a number of
factors that are directly related to the model of public administration and the level
of civil society development, it can be identified the relevant functional role of
decentralized authorities to the civil society establishment. In our opinion, it
performs the appropriate functional role, structure of which allows the
identification of:
1.
Intra-integrative role. Decentralization of power, which provides for
Community Empowerment, a prerequisite for their solidarity towards the
implementation of relevant socio-economic and political interests. According to D.
Bitkhen and K.Boyle, decentralization of power, primarily aimed at ensuring
"national unity, public authorities, transferring some of its powers to civil society,
influencing it in such a way that it reflects the interests of the nation as a political
community, thereby authorities and civil society work together in unison" [12].
In this respect, decentralization of power is normative-legal form of
consolidation of the "administrative and territorial units for the implementation of
law on behalf of the local population opportunities and the ability to identify a
particular public policy in matters of local importance in certain areas under their
responsibility" [13].
Doing this intra-integrative role, decentralization provides a synthesis of
certain interests of the state and civil society, removing some structural and
functional contradictions in relations between them. Most of these contradictions
objectively removed in terms of elections, when society is forced to be included in
the policy, accumulating their own resources to properly protect their interests.
However, there is always a risk of civil society to be implemented in the system of
institutions of power and in this way they become their direct actors. In this case,
they lose the opportunity to defend their interests, identifying themselves with
government institutions [14].
2.
The structural role. Decentralization of power provides political
structuring of society through appropriate horizontal links between state and
society, separating them into separate parts of a single social organism. The
absence of such structuring is a sign of underdeveloped civil society and the
corresponding weakness of the institutional structures of public administration.
Structural role of decentralization of power appears to prevent the absorption of
society by the state, clearly "ranking public interest, social interest groups and state
institutions" [15]. The above mentioned indicates that decentralization of power,
providing a structured relationship between the state and civil society, promotes
self-development of the latter and deprives it of excessive paternalism and opens
new opportunities for the implementation of its activities.
3.
Mobilization role. Decentralized governance institutions, aiming at
providing qualified public services to citizens, open space for internal migration,
allowing citizens to freely move from one region to another. Because in another
region may operate "other legal and educational systems, social security terms"
citizens migrate in the search of work and better services.
4.
Distributive role. Decentralized government activities, ensuring
redistribution "of power and management functions from the center for the benefit
of regional and local authorities" should always be the realization of national
interests and control of the interests of other regions. Due to the high level of
regional self-organization there is "the functional organization of the region, based
on the right initiative, referendum," which is only possible with the active
participation of civil society, which receives new impulses for their own
development.
5.
“Democratizational” role, which is manifested by transferring the
level of local government procedures of decision-making, which implies that most
of the decisions taken at grassroots levels of management hierarchy, they are
strategically important for the self-organizing structures of civil society, various
organizational functions of government verifiable from the community, reducing
the volume of centralized control, thereby ensuring greater autonomy of
communities.
6.
According to P. Veitt "by reducing administrative distances between
public authorities and local governments to improve their communities’
particularly strategic role in the development of the country and its democratic
institutions" [16]. As a result, there is formed the so-called "flat pyramidal
management system", the range of which is adjusted to needs of society and the
process of expansion is only through absolute reduction of vertical links. Thus
"pyramidal flat management system", which ensures maximum decentralization,
develops the need for society to realize its own potential for participation and
control over the activities of its institutions.
7.
Autonomous role. Decentralization, ensuring equality of administrative
units, recognizes the autonomy of regional rights to determine their own social
order. For the organization of public administration and decision-making civil
society is involved that should control the sanctity and equality in terms of
implementing appropriate models of autonomy. According to S. Baumhen
"modern states do not allow autonomy in its traditional version, as it can disrupt
the equality of regions, but within the law today is determined by the autonomy of
communities, associations, unions, corporations, providing their free development
required order, which are beneficial to the development of the forces of both
individual members and the totality of the unity or union" [17].
8.
Instrumental role. Decentralization of power, as a tool for the
transference of authorities to the places, designed to promote a clear delineation of
powers of the state and society. However, on this occasion T. Marshall pointed out
that "extreme democracy the states with a decentralized form of government are
permeated with can also be a challenge as the main purpose the states will not see
the creation of laws to all people without exception, and only the subordinate of all
only people to the law" [18].
On this occasion D. King and J. Stoker drew attention to the very nature of
instrumentality of the state, which carries a decentralized policy, which, in their
opinion, is manifested in the fact that "it, reserving the right to make and fairly and
strictly comply with the laws, forms strong legal basis, which is an important tool
of civil society" [19].
Instrumental decentralization of power is manifested in the fact that
through its influence the state and the community, representing some civil society
get more opportunities to implement mutual control and mutual responsibility.
Thus, decentralization through its instrumentality creates appropriate space for the
formation of a pluralistic civil society, the expansion of opportunities for their own
recruiting communities in various institutional structures that are designed to
defend their interests at the appropriate levels. An important role belongs to the
development of local government, which "creates spatial elements of independent
civil society that often exist quite apart from the state" [20].
8. Emancipatory role, which certifies the destruction of certain organic
connection between the state and civil society, as the high level of civic selforganization leads to the inclusion of individual citizens in all spheres of public
life. So, decentralization offers opportunities for establishing multivariate
relationships between citizens. According to A. Seligman, "multivariate
relationships require a new form of social forms that define a new model of public
administration functioning" [21]. Thus, decentralization of power leads to the
expansion of human rights, both politically and socially, creating appropriate space
for it, within which its social life is implemented and formed a certain public
space.
9. Modernization role. Decentralization of power as a separate political and
legal technology of public administration and local government optimization is
taking place "in conditions of crisis political situations, frequent changes of social
and state-legal paradigms that imposes a kind of reflection on the life of society"
[22]. Under these conditions often occurs the dispersal of public administration and
local government, and civil society is strategically ineffective at all levels of its
structural organization. Only decentralization of power can ensure the mobilization
of society for finding positive dynamics in the development of the state, which is
an important component of the implementation of modernization reforms.
The mobilization of civil society is due to the formation of shared
responsibility as a form of civic identity. According to J. Habermas, "the theme of
responsibility is the total community response to the problem, which asks the
authorities to find the right formula to address such problems in a decentralized
community rally together to give new impetus to its own functional development"
[23]. Therefore, "community initiative" is playing an important role here; feeling
isolated from the state accumulates to independently solve their problems. This
mobilization role of decentralization serves as an approval of public (state) and
civil match in the implementation of appropriate "civil initiatives".
Therefore, the carried out analysis allowed defining structural and
functional role of decentralization of power in the processes of civil society
establishment, ensuring its activation. It was determined that the decentralization
process in the development of civil society serves as a measuring ruler for
democratic government, creating a kind of technological basis for the development
of civil society. It is proved that the more formed civil society is, the more the state
"out-center" its function to it, and the more the state influenced the society,
introduced relevant regulations, the more the power was centralizes and then the
more declarative were impulses for the civil society development.