Originally federation indicated a loose alliance or union of states for limited purposes, usually military or commercial; and as such it could hardly be distinguished from confederacy. In the 18th century, however, the newly-independent American colonies developed a model of federal government which combined a strong role for the central or national authority with a degree of independence for the hitherto autonomous states. ‘Federalism’ is now used to describe such a form of government, in which power is constitutionally divided between different authorities in such a way that each exercises responsibility for a particular set of functions and maintains its own institutions to discharge those functions. In a federal system each authority therefore has sovereignty within its own sphere of responsibilities, because the powers which it exercises are not delegated to it by some other authority.
Federalism is often seen as a complex and cumbersome method of government because it involves a number of potentially overlapping jurisdictions and the maintenance of similar institutions at each level of administration; in the USA, for example, the presidency and Congress have equivalents in every state in a governor and state legislature. Federation is typically used in heterogeneous societies where it is thought necessary to allow distinct areas as much political autonomy as possible. Switzerland, with its different linguistic and religious groupings, is an example that has a history of federal association going back to the 13th century, although the modern Swiss Federation dates from 1874. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, as progress was made towards economic and political union in the European Union, very different interpretations were put upon federalism. Most member governments saw it as a system for allowing policy-making to take place at the national level wherever appropriate, while the British government in particular saw it as indicating centralization (see also subsidiarity).
The federal model was much favoured by British governments in the process of decolonization because it allowed small entities to be linked together for defence and foreign policy, and because it seemed an efficient way to protect minorities. Malaya acquired a federal constitution in 1948; Northern and Southern Rhodesia, and Nyasaland were federated in 1953; and the West Indies Federation was created in 1958. Many of these federations have not survived because some of the component parts wanted complete control over their own affairs; and the existence of a federal constitution did not prevent civil war and general political instability in Nigeria.
Size is also a major factor in determining whether a federal constitution is appropriate, since large areas are obviously more difficult to govern effectively from a single centre. Canada, Australia, India and the USA nowadays need federal constitutions, although Indian federalism is unusual in that the states were redefined after the creation of the federal constitution, as much for reasons of sheer size as because of their original political creation, in the same way that the Soviet Union was originally and necessarily federal and its largest successor state, the Russian Federation, is in the process of recreating highly devolved regionalism.
The precise balance of power between the central and local authorities in federal systems will vary between different federations and over time within a particular system. In the USA, for example, powers not originally granted to the federal government (among them the power to impose a federal income tax) have been acquired by constitutional amendment. Less formal methods have also been used to alter the federal–state balance. The courts have on occasion changed their interpretation of the proper spheres of activity of the federal and state authorities, as they did over reapportionment of congressional seats and criminal procedure in the USA in the 1960s; the increasing dependence of the states on the federal government for financial aid has in many ways enabled the federal government to influence policies which are nominally within the control of the state government. Some formally federal systems operate rather more like a unitary system with an uncommon degree of delegation. Germany is a federal republic, but in many areas the states act as agents for the central government, administering nationally-determined legislation; in some subjects, such as education, policing and land use, states decide their own policies but the politics of the national government tend to dominate all else.
Two constitutional features are found in most federal systems. There will frequently be an upper house or senate (see second chambers) where the states are represented in their own right and equally, as opposed to the representation proportionate to population allocated in the lower house; and there will usually be an enhanced role for the courts since the judiciary is normally required to adjudicate in disputes between the central and local authorities (see judicial review). Federalism always remains a possibility for a unitary state when regional, perhaps partially ethnic, divisions become too fraught for a single central authority ; thus the United Kingdom may be en route to federalism in granting varying degrees of autonomy to Wales and Scotland. There is no historical example, however, of a federal state being turned peacefully and successfully into a unitary one.
This is the complete article, containing 847 words
(approx. 3 pages at 300 words per page).
