National and regional elites in search of a compromise? Reforming regional administrative-territorial division as a problem of multilevel politics
Research Article
Acknowledgments
The study was carried out within the framework of a state assignment (topic No. 124021400020-6, “Multilevel policy in the modern world: institutional and socio-cultural dimensions”)
How to Cite
Panov P.V. National and regional elites in search of a compromise? Reforming regional administrative-territorial division as a problem of multilevel politics. Vlast i Elity (Power and Elites). 2025. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 7-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31119/pe.2025.12.1.1 (in Russ.).
Abstract
One of the key institutional dimensions of multilevel politics is the administrative-territorial division of the state (ATD), including its “fragmentation”, i.e. the size and number of administrative-territorial units (ATUs). Two theoretical traditions have been developed in understanding the processes of ATD reforms. The first emphasizes the central government’s intention for administrative effectiveness (“administrative motivation”), while the second focuses on the interactions between national and subnational elites pursuing their own interests (“regionalist motivation”). From this perspective, the article examines the reforms of regional ATD. Based on information from various sources, all the reforms of regional ATD in 146 countries over the past three decades have been systematized and analyzed from the view of five possible scenarios. The most common scenario is the creation of new regional ATUs within the existing ATD, while the scenarios of radical reforms aimed at either eliminating the regional level or creating it are the least common. The study demonstrates that in all five scenarios there are both the cases, where the “administrative motivation” dominates (France, Denmark, Malaysia, etc.), and the reforms caused by the “regionalist motivation”, when the goal is to satisfy the interests of regional elites (India, Canada, Ethiopia, etc.) or, conversely, to weaken regionalist movements (Laos, Pakistan, etc.). Some statistical tests indirectly indicate that both motivations occur not only in individual empirical cases, but can be considered as general trends for the countries of the world as a whole.
Keywords:
elites, multilevel politics, region, administrative-territorial division, reforms, scenarios
References
1) Bogatyreva O.N. Decentralization and regionalization in France: the main stages. Rossijskij juridicheskij zhurnal. 2017. No. 6. P. 100–109. (In Russ.)
2) Okunev I.Yu. Political Geography. Moscow: Aspect Press Publishing House, 2019. 512 p. (In Russ.)
3) Semeko G.V. Territorial reforms in France: from decentralization to recentralization of the state governance. Ars Administrandi. 2017. Vol. 9. No. 3. Р. 476–494. https://doi.org/10.17072/2218-9173-2017-3-476-494 (In Russ.)
4) Turovsky R.F. Politicheskaya regionalistika [Political regional studies]. Moscow: Publishing House of the State University Higher School of Economics, 2006. 780 p. (In Russ.)
5) Abels G., Battke J. Regional governance in the EU or: What happened to the ‘Europe of the regions’? Introduction. Regional governance in the EU: regions and the future of Europe. Ed. by G. Abels, J. Battke. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2019. P. 1–15.
6) Alesina A., Devleeschauwer A., Easterly W., Kurlat S., Wacziarg R. Fractionalization. Journal of economic growth. 2003. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 155–94. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024471506938
7) Anttiroiko A., Valkama P. The role of localism in the development of regional structures in post-war Finland. Public policy and administration. 2017. Vol. 32. No. 2. P. 152–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076716658797
8) Bhattacharyya H. Asymmetric federalism in India. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 2023. 220 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23727-0.
9) Brand D. Asymmetry in the federal systems — constitutional arrangements in South Africa. European diversity and autonomy papers. 2008. No. 1. 23 p.
10) Breen M. Nepal, federalism and participatory constitution-making: deliberative democracy and divided societies. Asian journal of political science. 2018. Vol. 26. No. 3. P. 410–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2018.1515639.
11) Calderon A. Englebert P., Jené L. When decentralisation undermines representation: ethnic exclusion and state ownership in DR Congo’s new provinces. Journal of modern African studies. 2021. Vol. 59. No. 2. P. 131–157. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X21000045.
12) Fessha Y. The original sin of Ethiopian federalism. Ethnopolitics. 2017. Vol. 16. No. 3. P. 232–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2016.1254410.
13) Green E. Patronage, district creation, and reform in Uganda. Studies in comparative international development. 2010. Vol. 45. No. 1. P. 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-009-9058-8.
14) Grossman G., Lewis J. Administrative unit proliferation. American political science review. 2014. Vol. 108. No. 1. Р. 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055413000567.
15) Hooghe L., Marks G. Community, scale, and regional governance: A post-functionalist theory of governance, Volume II. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. 195 p. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198766971.001.0001.
16) Kimura E. Proliferating provinces: territorial politics in Post-Suharto Indonesia. South East Asia research. 2010. Vol. 18. No. 3. Р. 415–449. https://doi.org/10.5367/sear.2010.0005
17) Malesky E. Gerrymandering — Vietnamese style: escaping the partial reform equilibrium in a nondemocratic regime. The journal of politics. 2009. Vol. 71. No. 1. Р. 132–159. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381608090099
18) Pierskalla J. Splitting the difference? The politics of district creation in Indonesia. Comparative politics. 2016. Vol. 48. No. 2. P. 249–268. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041516817037754
19) Rokkan S. Cities, states and nations: A dimensional model for the study of contrasts in development. Building states and nations: Models and data resources. Ed. by S. Eisenstadt, S. Rokkan. Vol. 1. London: Sage, 1973. P. 73–91.
20) Rybář M., Spáč P. Slovakia: the unbearable lightness of regionalization. Regional and national elections in Eastern Europe. Territoriality of the vote in ten countries. Ed. by A. Schakel. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. P. 239–259.
21) Saylor R. Ethnic entrepreneurs and movements for new administrative units: lessons from Nigeria. Publius: The journal of federalism. 2016. Vol. 46. No. 4. P. 568–595. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjw016
22) Sjöblom S. Finnish regional governance structures in flux: reform processes between European and domestic influences. Regional & Federal Studies. 2020. Vol. 30. No. 2. P. 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2018.1541891
23) Sseremba Y. Ethnic emancipation and conflict escalation in Uganda. Third World Quarterly. 2020. Vol. 41. No. 12. P. 2030–2047. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2020.1803059
24) Stilz A. Territory and self-determination. Annual review of political science. 2024. Vol. 27. P. 337–354. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-045000
25) The forum of federations handbook of federal countries 2020. Ed. by A. Griffiths et al. Springer Nature, 2020. 404 p.
2) Okunev I.Yu. Political Geography. Moscow: Aspect Press Publishing House, 2019. 512 p. (In Russ.)
3) Semeko G.V. Territorial reforms in France: from decentralization to recentralization of the state governance. Ars Administrandi. 2017. Vol. 9. No. 3. Р. 476–494. https://doi.org/10.17072/2218-9173-2017-3-476-494 (In Russ.)
4) Turovsky R.F. Politicheskaya regionalistika [Political regional studies]. Moscow: Publishing House of the State University Higher School of Economics, 2006. 780 p. (In Russ.)
5) Abels G., Battke J. Regional governance in the EU or: What happened to the ‘Europe of the regions’? Introduction. Regional governance in the EU: regions and the future of Europe. Ed. by G. Abels, J. Battke. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2019. P. 1–15.
6) Alesina A., Devleeschauwer A., Easterly W., Kurlat S., Wacziarg R. Fractionalization. Journal of economic growth. 2003. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 155–94. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024471506938
7) Anttiroiko A., Valkama P. The role of localism in the development of regional structures in post-war Finland. Public policy and administration. 2017. Vol. 32. No. 2. P. 152–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076716658797
8) Bhattacharyya H. Asymmetric federalism in India. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 2023. 220 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23727-0.
9) Brand D. Asymmetry in the federal systems — constitutional arrangements in South Africa. European diversity and autonomy papers. 2008. No. 1. 23 p.
10) Breen M. Nepal, federalism and participatory constitution-making: deliberative democracy and divided societies. Asian journal of political science. 2018. Vol. 26. No. 3. P. 410–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2018.1515639.
11) Calderon A. Englebert P., Jené L. When decentralisation undermines representation: ethnic exclusion and state ownership in DR Congo’s new provinces. Journal of modern African studies. 2021. Vol. 59. No. 2. P. 131–157. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X21000045.
12) Fessha Y. The original sin of Ethiopian federalism. Ethnopolitics. 2017. Vol. 16. No. 3. P. 232–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2016.1254410.
13) Green E. Patronage, district creation, and reform in Uganda. Studies in comparative international development. 2010. Vol. 45. No. 1. P. 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-009-9058-8.
14) Grossman G., Lewis J. Administrative unit proliferation. American political science review. 2014. Vol. 108. No. 1. Р. 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055413000567.
15) Hooghe L., Marks G. Community, scale, and regional governance: A post-functionalist theory of governance, Volume II. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. 195 p. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198766971.001.0001.
16) Kimura E. Proliferating provinces: territorial politics in Post-Suharto Indonesia. South East Asia research. 2010. Vol. 18. No. 3. Р. 415–449. https://doi.org/10.5367/sear.2010.0005
17) Malesky E. Gerrymandering — Vietnamese style: escaping the partial reform equilibrium in a nondemocratic regime. The journal of politics. 2009. Vol. 71. No. 1. Р. 132–159. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381608090099
18) Pierskalla J. Splitting the difference? The politics of district creation in Indonesia. Comparative politics. 2016. Vol. 48. No. 2. P. 249–268. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041516817037754
19) Rokkan S. Cities, states and nations: A dimensional model for the study of contrasts in development. Building states and nations: Models and data resources. Ed. by S. Eisenstadt, S. Rokkan. Vol. 1. London: Sage, 1973. P. 73–91.
20) Rybář M., Spáč P. Slovakia: the unbearable lightness of regionalization. Regional and national elections in Eastern Europe. Territoriality of the vote in ten countries. Ed. by A. Schakel. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. P. 239–259.
21) Saylor R. Ethnic entrepreneurs and movements for new administrative units: lessons from Nigeria. Publius: The journal of federalism. 2016. Vol. 46. No. 4. P. 568–595. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjw016
22) Sjöblom S. Finnish regional governance structures in flux: reform processes between European and domestic influences. Regional & Federal Studies. 2020. Vol. 30. No. 2. P. 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2018.1541891
23) Sseremba Y. Ethnic emancipation and conflict escalation in Uganda. Third World Quarterly. 2020. Vol. 41. No. 12. P. 2030–2047. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2020.1803059
24) Stilz A. Territory and self-determination. Annual review of political science. 2024. Vol. 27. P. 337–354. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-045000
25) The forum of federations handbook of federal countries 2020. Ed. by A. Griffiths et al. Springer Nature, 2020. 404 p.
Article
Received: 06.05.2025
Accepted: 28.08.2025
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:
ACM
[1]
Panov, P.V. 2025. National and regional elites in search of a compromise? Reforming regional administrative-territorial division as a problem of multilevel politics. Vlast i Elity (Power and Elites). 12, 1 (Aug. 2025), 7-37. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31119/pe.2025.12.1.1.
Section
Political elites in comparative perspective
