Localized Government's role in Sustainable governance (Part 1)

Cities and Localization     

      It seems that cities are underrated across the board. While every so often a city might make the news, very rarely do they get the same amount of coverage as nations as a whole. That's disappointing for any number of reasons, but the role they play in people's lives is likely one of the most important.Cities have become the human biome, containing 79% of Europeans, 80% of Latin Americans, 81% of Americans, and 47% of Asians and Africans by the year 2015 (Grasa and Arnau).
   
      People talk about governments and countries as if they were not composed of people and cities, something that has perhaps motivated the steady progression towards centralized control of the nation's political process. But in terms of sustainability, centralized government might not be ideal form for democracy; the failings of the United States government, real or imaginary, can be found on practically any newscast. At least examining other possibilities seems worthwhile; improvements to how we conduct governance could have major repercussions, both structurally and economic. Political theorist Benjamin Barber argues in his Tedtalk Why Mayors Should Rule the World that more localized governance might be best (http://goo.gl/eB4bhT); in the vein of his thoughts, I want to at least explore the respective benefits and detriments of such an idea to see if it's viable to the degree he imagines.

      

      Make no mistake; this is not an attempt to decry national governments and argue for their deconstruction. I believe a middle ground exists between solely national and solely local; this post merely wants to explore the benefits of shifting more power to the local. If anything, it could be argued that power decentralization is a good thing for national government's strength overall, as it frees up administrative sides of governments to focus on more pressing issues like defense or poverty reduction, rather than be tied to minutia. 

     

      Barber starts with several examples of key political events, noting that many are grounded in cities. His point is that an event like the Tienanmen Square massacre is interesting because it is grounded in the city and not the nation as a whole. Something like the Boston Massacre is not the Massachusetts Massacre (which admittedly sounds better), or the USA Massacre; it focuses on the city because that is where the event actually mattered. Cities have a number of attributes that make them perfect for staging political demonstrations, but also, he argues, the resources to see effective change occur. Why? I think there are three main reasons.

Reasons for Cities' Political Efficacy  

      1. Cities have a far closer relationship to the people than states or nations do. The people can see their representatives as individuals, not the disembodied mass in Washington known as "the Government." Barber actually notes in his speech several examples of mayors actually walking their streets and interacting with citizens. Senators and Congressmen don't do this; at least not until their reelection season. 

      2. As a result of closer connections, people can demand more of their elected officers.  Accountability is upheld by lower term limits and the scale; the impacts of decisions are noticeable almost immediately to the commonwealth. 

      3. As a result of those two things, the nature of more localized governmental positions is quite different than a national role. While at a national scale politicians must assume the role of one side or another, that's far more difficult at a local scale. Because the repercussions of actions can be immediately felt, mayors and public officials must carefully weigh all sides of a decision before making it. Even if they run as a certain type of political candidate, they still have to be pragmatists; they're not fighting for issues, but for the fate of their city as a whole. 

Problems with that View

      With all of that in mind, local demonstrations seem to be the best form of political action, as they would   logically tend to get things done. But, like most things, it isn't that simple. The average voter turnout in US federal elections since 1996 hovers between 50 and 60 percent (Mcdonald)...but the same turnout in 340 US mayoral elections during the same period was only 25.8% (Holbrook and Weinschank). Even if cities are the best place for people's voices to be heard, they aren't the places the American people are looking for representation. Whether this is an indication that the public thinks cities lack power or an indication that they actually do, the point remains that cities in the United States don't have the capability to effectively engage their people. If they could, the people's interests might be represented far more than usual, but as it stands, they do not. 

      

      The question of whether local governance can help people has been answered, but the matter of whether it does help them has not. This post has gone on fairly long already, so I'll continue the discussion in the next one. The question to keep in mind is this; what can be done if representation fails at larger scales? Localized governance appears to be a possibility, but without examining the benefits and detriments of such a system, the answer is still unknown. 

   

Grasa, Rafael, and Camps, Arnau G. Conflict Prevention and Decentralized Governance: Some remarks about the state of the art in theory and practice. International Catalan Institute for Peace, Gran Via, Barcelona, 2009. Digital. 

Holbrook, T., and Weinschenk, A. Campaigns, Mobilization, and Turnout in Mayoral Elections. Political Research Quarterly. 15 July, 2013.

Javanrouh, S. toronto's city hall. Flickr.com. 25 Sep, 2006. Digital. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/Wyw5li

Leeson, E. City that I love.... Flickr.com. 14 Oct, 2008. Digital. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nNu3Di

Mantel, M. City of London. Flickr.com. 20 Aug, 2013. Digital. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1p1KJbq

Mcdonald, M. Voter Turnout. Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia. 2012. http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm