Intergovernmental Cooperation: Rational Choices in Federal Systems and Beyond

Intergovernmental Cooperation: Rational Choices in Federal Systems and Beyond

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 1-272

  Bolleyer, Nicole ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Canada; Cross jurisdictional problem solving; European Union; Executive legislative relations; Federalism; Institutional choice; Intergovernmental cooperation; Intergovernmental relations; Multilevel systems; Switzerland; United States

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449370194     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570607.001.0001     Document Type: Book

References (253)

1. Abbott, K. W., Keohane, R. O., Movravcsik, A., Slaughter, A.-M., and Snidal, D. (2000). The concept of legalization. International Organization 54, 401-19.
2. Abderhalden, U. (1999). Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der interkantonalen Zusammenarbeit. Freiburg: Universitätsverlag.
3. Adamovich, I. B. and Hosp, G. (2003). Fiscal federalism for emerging economies: lessons from Switzerland? Publius: The Journal of Federalism 33(1), 1-21.
4. Agranoff, R. (Ed.) (1999a). Accomodating Diversity: Asymmetry in Federal States. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
5. Agranoff, R. (1999b). Intergovernmental relations and the management of asymmetry in federal Spain. In Agranoff, R. (Ed.), Accomodating Diversity: Asymmetry in Federal States. Baden- Baden: Nomos.
6. Agranoff, R. (2004). Autonomy, devolution, and intergovernmental relations. Regional and Federal Studies 14, 26-65.
7. Armingeon, K. (2000a). Swiss federalism in comparative perspective. In Wachendorfer- Schmidt, U. (Ed.), Federalism and Political Performance. London: Routledge.
8. Armingeon, K. (2000b). Corporatism and consociational democracy. In Keman, H. (Ed.), Comparative Politics, New Directions in Theory and Method. London: Routledge.
9. Armingeon, K. (2002). The effects of negotiation democracy. A comparative analysis. European Journal of Political Research 41, 81-101.
10. Arnold, D. S. and Plant, J. (1994). Public Official Associations and State and Local Government. Fairfax: George Mason University Press.
11. Auel, K. (2005). Introduction: Europeanisation of parliamentary democracy. Journal of Legislative Studies 11, 303-18.
12. Auel, K. and Benz, A. (2007). Expanding national parliamentary control: does it enhance European democracy? In Kohler-Koch, B. and Rittberger, B. (Eds.), Debating the Democratic Legitimicy of the European Union. Lanham: Rowan and Littlefield.
13. Axelrod, R. M. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
14. Bache, I. and Flinders, M. (Eds.) (2004). Multi-Level Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Bächtiger, A. and Hitz, A. (2006). The matrix extended: federal-municipal relations in switzerland. In Lazar, H. and Leuprecht, C. (Eds.), Spheres of Governance: Comparative Studies of Cities in Multilevel Governance Systems. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
16. Baier, G. (2002). New judicial thinking on sovereignty and federalism: American and Canadian comparisons. The Justice System Journal 23.
17. Banting, K. and Corbett, S. (Eds.) (2001). Health Policy and Federalism: A Comparative Perspective on Multi-level Governance. Kingston: Queen's University Press.
18. Bardach, E. (1998). Getting Agencies Work Together: The Practice and Theory of Managerial Craftsmanship. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
19. Bartolini, S. (2005). Restructuring Europe: Centre Formation, System Building and Political Structuring between the Nation-State and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Benz, A. (1985). Föderalismus als dynamisches System, Zentralisierung und Dezentralisierung im föderativen Staat. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
21. Benz, A. (2000). Anmerkungen zur Diskussion über Verhandlungsdemokratie. In Holtmann, H. (Ed.), Zwischen Wettbewerbs- und Verhandlungsdemokratie. Analysen zum Regierungssystem der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
22. Benz, A. (2003). Konstruktive Vetospieler in Mehrebenensystemen. In Mayntz, R. S. and Streek, W. (Eds.), Die Reformierbarkeit der Demokratie, Innovationen und Blockaden. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.
23. Benz, A. (2004a). Multilevel Governance: Governance in Mehrebenensystemen. In Benz, A. (Ed.), Governance: Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
24. Benz, A. (2004b). Institutionelle Regime in Bundesstaaten und in der Europäischen Union. In Marschall, S. and Struenck. C. (Eds.), Grenzenlose Macht? Politik und Politikwissenschaft im Umbruch. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
25. Benz, A. and Papadopoulos, Y. (Eds.) (2006). Governance and Democracy, Comparing National, European and International Experiences. London: Routledge.
26. Benz, A. Scharpf, F., and Zintl, R. (Eds.) (1992). Horizontale Politikverflechtung, Zur Theorie von Verhandlungssystemen. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.
27. Beyle, T. L. (1983). The governor as chief legislator. In Beyle, T. L. and Muchmore, L. R. (Eds.), Being Governor: A View from the Office. Durham: Duke Press Policy Studies.
28. Beyle, T. L. and Dalton, R. (1983). The governor and the state legislature. In Beyle, T. L. and Muchmore, L. R. (Eds.), Being Governor: A View from the Office. Durham: Duke Press Policy Studies.
29. Beyle, T. L. and Muchmore, L. R. (1983). Governors in the American federal system. In Beyle, T. L. and Muchmore, L. R. (Eds.), Being Governor: A View from the Office. Durham: Duke Press Policy Studies.
30. Birchfield, V. and Crepaz, M. (1998) The impact of constitutional structures and collective and competitive veto points on income inequality in industrialised democracies. European Journal of Political Research 34, 175-200.
31. Blondel, J., Müller-Rommel, F., and Malova, D. (Eds.) (2007). Governing New European Democracies. London: Palgrave.
32. Bochsler, D. (2006). Quantitative Analyse der Konkordate: Abkommen unter Nachbarn oder unter Freunden? Working Paper, Université de Genève, Geneva.
33. Bochsler, D. Koller, C., Sciarini P., Traimond, S., and Trippolini, I. (2004). Die Schweizer Kantone unter der Lupe: Behörden, Personal, Finanzen. Bern: Haupt.
34. Bolleyer, N. (2006) Intergovernmental arrangements in Spanish and Swiss federalism: the impact of power-concentrating and power-sharing executives on intergovernmental institutionalization. Regional and Federal Studies 16, 385-408.
35. Bolleyer, N. and Börzel, T. A. (2007). Non-hierarchical coordination in multilevel settings- American, Canadian and Swiss lessons for the European Union. Paper presented at the APSA Annual Meeting, Panel in Chicago, United States, 1 September.
36. Bolleyer, N. and Bytzek, E. (2009). Conflict and institutionalization in intergovernmental relations: a comparative assessment of government congruence in six countries. Regional and Federal Studies.
37. Bolleyer, N. and Thorlakson, L.(2008). Beyond decentralization: measuring the interlocked state. Paper presented at the MPSA 66th Annual Conference in Chicago, 3-6 April.
38. Börzel, T. A. (2000). From cooperative regionalism to cooperative federalism: the Europeanization of the Spanish state of autonomies. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 30, 17-42.
39. Börzel, T. A. (2001). Föderative Staaten in einer entgrenzten Welt: Regionaler Standortwettbewerb oder gemeinsames Regieren jenseits des Nationalstaates. In Benz, A. and Lehmbruch, G. (Eds.), Föderalismus. Analysen in entwicklungsgeschichtlicher Perspektive (PVS Sonderheft 32). Wiesbaden: Nomos.
40. Börzel, T. A. (2002). States and Regions in the European Union: Institutional Adaptation in Germany and Spain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. Börzel, T. A. (2005a) What can federalism teach us about the European Union? The German experience. Regional and Federal Studies 15, 245-57.
42. Börzel, T. A. (2005b). Mind the gap! European integration between level and scope. Journal of European Public Policy 12, 1-20.
43. Börzel, T. A. (2007). EU Governance: Verhandlungen im Schatten von Hierarchie und Wettbewerb. In Tömmel, I. (Ed.), Die Europäische Union: Governance und Policy-making (PVS Sonderheft 40). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
44. Börzel, T. A. and Hösli, M. (2003). Brussels between Berne and Berlin: comparative federalism meets the European Union. Governance 16, 179-202.
45. Bowman, A. O'M. (2002). American federalism on the horizon. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 32, 3-22.
46. Bowman, A. O'M. (2004a). Horizontal federalism: exploring interstate interaction. Journal of Public Administration Research 14, 535-46.
47. Bowman, A. O'M. (2004b). Trends and issues in interstate cooperation. In Council of State Governments (Ed.), The Book of the States 2004. Lexington: Council of State Governments.
48. Braun, D. (2000). Public Policy and Federalism. Aldershot: Ashgate.
49. Braun, D. (2003). Dezentraler und unitarischer Föderalismus. Die Schweiz und Deutschland im Vergleich. Swiss Political Science Review 9(1): 57-89.
50. Braun, C. (2004). Historisches Kantonsreferendum: Resultat der interkantonalen Zusammenarbeit? .
51. Breton, A. (1985). Supplementary statement. Government of Canada, Royal Commission on the Economic Union and Development Prospects for Canada 3, 486-526.
52. Breton, A. (1996). Competitive Governments: An Economic Theory of Politics and Public Finance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53. Brown, D. M. (2002). Market Rules: Economic Union Reform and Intergovernmental Policy-Making in Australia and Canada. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
54. Bryman, A. (2001). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
55. Cameron, D. R. (2005). Canada. In Griffith, A. L. (Ed.). Handbook of Federal Countries, 2005. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
56. Cameron, D. R. and Simeon, R. (2002). Intergovernmental relations in Canada. The emergence of collaborative federalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 32, 49-71.
57. Camissa, A. M. (1995). Governments as Interest Groups. Westport: Praeger.
58. Cattoir, P. (1998). Fédéralisme et Solidarité Financière: Étude Comparative de Six Pays. Bruxelles: CRISP.
59. Chapman, R. J. K. (1993). Structure, process and the federal factor: complexity and entanglement in federations. In Burgess, M. and Gagnon A.-G. (Eds.), Comparative Federalism and Federation: Competing Traditions and Future Directions. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
60. Christiansen, T. and Christine R. (2009). Constitutionalizing the European Union. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
61. Chubb, J. E. and Peterson, P. E. (1989). American political institutions and the problem of governance. In Chubb, J. E. and Peterson, P. E. (Eds.), Can the Government Govern? Washington, D.C.: Brookings.
62. Cigler, B. A. (1995). Not just another special interest. In Cigler, B. A. and Loomis, B. A. (Eds.), Interest Group Politics. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Inc.
63. Coglianese, C. and Nicolaidis, K.(2001). Securing subsidiarity: the institutional design of federalism in the United States and Europe. In Nicolaidis, K. and Howse, R. (Eds.), The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64. Conlan, T. J. (2000). Courting devolution: the U.S. supreme court and contemporary American federalism. In Schultze, R.-O. and Sturm, R. (Eds.), The Politics of Constitutional Reform in North America, Coping with New Challenges. Opladen: Leske and Budrich.
65. Conlan, T. J. (2006). From cooperative to opportunistic federalism: reflections on the halfcentury anniversary of the commission on intergovernmental relations. Public Administration Review, September-October, 663-76.
66. Crihfield, B. and Reeves, C. H. (1974). Intergovernmental relations: a view from the States. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 416, 99-107.
67. Czada, R. (2000). Konkordanz, Korporatismus und Politikverflechtung: Dimensionen der Verhandlungsdemokratie. In Holtmann, E. and Voelzkow, H. (Eds.), Zwischen Wettbewerbs- und Verhandlungsdemokratie. Analysen zum Regierungssystem der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
68. Czada, R. (2003). Der Begriff der Verhandlungsdemokratie in der Vergleichenden Policy-Forschung. In Mayntz, R. S. and Streek, W. (Eds.), Die Reformierbarkeit der Demokratie, Innovationen und Blockaden. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.
69. Dennison, D. G. (2005). Intergovernmental mechanisms: what have we learned? Retrospective on the conduct of intergovernmental relations: review of machinery and processes of relations among governments in Canada, and their evolution over the years. Looking Backward, Thinking Forward. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen's University.
70. Derthick, M. (2001). Keeping the Compound Republic: Essays on Federalism. Washington, D.C.: Brookings.
71. Dinan, J. and Krane, D. (2005). The state of American federalism, 2005: federalism resurfaces in the political debate. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 36, 327-74.
72. Donahue, J. D. and Pollack, M. A. (2001). Centralization and its discontents: the rhythms of federalism in the United States and the European Union. In Nicolaidis, K. and Howse, R. (Eds.), The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
73. Downs, W. M. (1998). Coalition Government Subnational Style: Multiparty Politics in Europe's Regional Parliaments. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
74. Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., and Barsoom, P. N. (1996). Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation? International Organization 50(3), 379-406.
75. Dyck, R. (1986). Provincial Politics in Canada. Scarborough: Prentice Hall.
76. Dye, T. R. (1985). Politics in States and Communities. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
77. Elazar, D. J. (1984). American Federalism: A View from the States, 3rd Edn. New York: Harper and Row.
78. Elazar, D. S. (1990). Opening the third century of American federalism: issues and prospects. In Kincaid, J. (Ed.), American Federalism: The Third Century. Newbury Park: Sage.
79. Elazar, D. S. (1991). Cooperative federalism. In Kenyon, D. A. and Kincaid, J. (Eds.), Competition among States and Local Governments: Efficiency and Equity in American Federalism.Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
80. Elazar, D. S. (2001). The United States and the European Union: models for their epochs. In Nicolaidis, K. and Howse, R. (Eds.), The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
81. Esman, M. J. (1984). Federalism and modernization: Canada and the United States. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 14, 21-38.
82. Fafard, C. P. and Harrison, K. (2000). Managing the Environmental Union: Intergovernmental Relations and Environmental Policy in Canada. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen's University.
83. Fagagnini, H. P. (1978). Die Rolle der Parteien auf kantonaler Ebene. Schweizer Jahrbuch für Politische Wissenschaft 18, 75-94.
84. Filippov, M., Ordeshook, P. C., and Shvetsova, O. (2004). Designing Federalism: A Theory of Self-Sustainable Federal Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
85. Fleiner, T. (2006). Swiss confederation. In Majeed, A. W., Watts, R. L., and Brown, D. M. (Eds.), The Distribution of Powers and Responsibilities in Federal Countries. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
86. Forget, C. E. (2001). Success, omissions and challenges in harmonizing Canada's social program. In Salmon, T. C. and Keating, M. (Eds.), The Dynamics of Decentralization: Canadian Federalism and British Devolution. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
87. Freiburghaus, D. and Zehnder, V.(2003). Horizontale Kooperation zwischen den Kantonen und die 'systematisch-pragmatische Zusammenarbeit' in der Zentralschweiz. Working Paper des Institut de Hautes Etudes en Administration Publique 4, 1-15.
88. Frenkel, M. (1986). Interkantonale Institutionen und Politikbereiche. In Germann, R. E.and Weibel, E. (Eds.), Handbuch Politisches System der Schweiz. Bern: Haupt.
89. Gage, R. W. (1992). Sector alignments of regional councils: implications for intergovernmental relations in the 1990s. American Review of Public Administration 22, 207-24.
90. Gerlak, A. K. (2006). Federalism and U.S. water policy: lessons from the twenty-first century. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 36, 231-57.
91. Grande, (2001). Parteiensystem und Föderalismus, Institutionelle Strukturmuster und politische Dynamiken im internationalen Vergleich. In Benz, A. and Lehmbruch, L. (Eds.), Föderalismus. Analysen in Entwicklungsgeschichtlicher Perspektive (PVS Sonderheft 32). Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
92. Grau I Creus, M. (2000). Spain: incomplete federalism. In Wachendorfer-Schmidt, U. (Ed.), Federalism and Political Performance. London: Routledge.
93. Gray, V. (1973). Innovation in the States: a diffusion study. American Political Science Review 67, 1174-85.
94. Gray, V. and Eisinger, P. (1991). American States and Cities. New York: HarperCollins Publisher, Inc.
95. Green-Pedersen, C. (2001). Minority governments and party politics: the political and institutional background to the 'Danish miracle'. Journal of Public Policy 21, 53-70.
96. Grees, F. (1996). Interstate cooperation and territorial representation in intermestic politics. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 26, 53-71.
97. Greif, A. (2006). Institutions and the Path to Modern Economy: Lessons from Medieval Trade. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
98. Grodzins, M. (1966). The American System: A New View of Government in the United States. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.
99. Grossback, L. J., Nicholson-Crotty, S., and Peterson, D. A. M. (2004). Ideology and learning in policy diffusion. American Political Science Review 32, 521-45.
100. Gunlicks, A. B. (1988). Constitutional law and the protection of subnational governments in the United States and West Germany. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 18, 141-58.
101. Haider, D. H. (1974). When Governments Go to Washington: Governors, Mayors and Intergovernmental Lobbying. New York: The Free Press.
102. Hall, P. A. and Taylor, C. R. (1996). Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Studies 44, 936-57.
103. Heinmiller, B. T. (2002). Finding a way forward in the study of intergovernmental policymaking. Canadian Public Administration 45, 427-33.
104. Héritier, A. (1998). Political institutions, decision styles, and policy choices. In Czada, R., Héritier, A., and Keman, H. (Eds.), Institutions and Political Choice, On the Limits of Rationality. Amsterdam: VU University Press.
105. Hickok, E. W., Jr. (1990). Federalism's future before the Supreme U.S. Court. In Kincaid, J. (Ed.), American Federalism: The Third Century. Newbury Park: Sage.
106. Hill, C. (1993). The capability-expectations gap or conceptualizing the Europe's international role. Journal of Common Market Studies 31, 305-28.
107. Hocking, B. (1999). Patrolling the 'frontier': globalization, localization and the 'actorness' of non-central governments. In Aldecoa, F. and Keating, M. (Eds.), Paradiplomacy in Action: The Foreign Relations of Subnational Governments. London: Frank Cass.
108. Hooghe, L. (Ed.) (1996). Cohesion Policy and European Integration: Building Multi-Level Governance. Oxford: Clarendon.
109. Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2001). Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
110. Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? American Political Science Review 97, 233-43.
111. Hoornbeck, J. A. (2004). Policy-making institutions and water policy outputs in the European Union and the United States: a comparative analysis. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(3), 461-96.
112. Hueglin, T. O. and Fenna, A. (2006). Comparative Federalism: A Systematic Inquiry. Peterborough: Broadview Press Ltd.
113. Jans, T. M. and Tombeur, H. (2000). Living apart together: the Belgian intergovernmental cooperation in the domains of environment and economy. In Braun D. (Ed.), Public Policy and Federalism. Aldershot: Ashgate.
114. Johns, C., O'Reilly, P. L., and Inwood, G. J. (2006). Intergovernmental innovation and the administrative state in Canada. Governance 19, 627-49.
115. Johns, C., O'Reilly, P. L., and Inwood, G. J. (2007). Formal and informal dimensions of intergovernmental administrative relations in Canada. Canadian Public Administration 50, 21-41.
116. Joumard, I. and Kongsrud, P. M. (2003). Fiscal relations across governmental levels. OECD Economic Studies 36, 155-229.
117. Judge, D. (2003). Legislative institutionalization: a bent analytical arrow? Government and Opposition 38, 497-514.
118. Kaiser, A. (1997). Types of democracy: From classical to new institutionalism. Journal of Theoretical Politics 9, 419-44.
119. Katz, R. S. (1994). Party organizations as empty vessels: parties in American politics. In Katz, R. S. and Mair, P. (Eds.), How Parties Organise: Change and Adaptation in Party Organizations in Western Democracies. London: Sage.
120. Kelemen, R. D. (2004). The Rules of Federalism, Institutions and Regulatory Politics in Europe and Beyond. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press.
121. Kelly, J. B. and Murphy, M. (2005). Shaping the constitutional dialogue on federalism: Canada's Supreme Court as meta-political actor. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 19, 217-43.
122. Kennett, S.A. (1998). The Courchene Proposal. Securing the Social Union: A Commentary on the Decentralized Approach. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.
123. Kenyon, D. A. and Kincaid, J. (Eds.) (1991). Competition among States and Local Governments, Efficiency and Equity in American Federalism. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
124. Keohane, R. O. (1982). The demand for international regimes. International Organization 36, 325-55.
125. Kincaid, J. (1990). From cooperative to coercive federalism. In Kincaid, J. (Ed.), American Federalism: The Third Century. Newbury Park: Sage.
126. Kincaid, J. (2001). Devolution in the United States: rhetoric and reality. In Nicolaidis, K. and Howse, R. (Eds.), The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
127. Kincaid, J. (2003). Globalization and federalism in the United States: continuity in adaptation. In Lazar, H, Telford, H., and Watts, R. L. (Eds.), The Impact of Global and Regional Integration on Federal Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Montreal/Kingston: McGills- Queen's University Press.
128. Krause, G. A. and Bowman, A. O'M. (2005). Adverse selection, political parties, and policy delegation in the American federal system. The Journal of Law, Economics & Organization 21, 359-87.
129. Laakso, M. and Taagepera, R. (1979). Effective number of parties: a measure with application to West Europe. Comparative Political Studies 12, 3-27.
130. Ladner, A. (2001). Swiss political parties: between persistence and change. West European Politics 24,123-44.
131. Lawson, K. (2004). Five variations of a theme: interest aggregation by party today. In Lawson, K. and Poguntke, T. (Eds), How Political Parties Respond, Interest Aggregation Revisited. London: Routledge.
132. Lazar, H. (2000). The social union framework agreement and the future of fiscal federalism. In Lazar, H (Ed.), Canada: State of the Federation, 1999/2000: Toward a New Mission Statement for Canadian Fiscal Federalism. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
133. Lazar, H. and McIntosh, T. (1998). Federalism, Democracy and Social Policy: Towards a Sectoral Analysis of the Social Union. Project Methodology for Governance Aspects of the Social Union, Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen's University, Kingston.
134. Lazar, H. and McLean, J. (2000). Non-constitutional reform and the Canadian Federation: the only game in town. In Schultze, R. O. and Sturm, R. (Eds.), The Politics of Constitutional Reform in North America: Coping with New Challenges. Opladen: Leske + Budrich, 149-76.
135. Lazar, H. Telford, H., and Watts, R. L. (2003). Divergent trajectories: the impact of global and regional integration on federal systems. In Lazar, H., Telford, H., and Watts, R. L. (Eds.), The Impact of Global and Regional Integration on Federal Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
136. Lecours, A. (2004). Moreno's multiple ethnoterritorial concurrence model: a reformulation. Regional and Federal Studies 14, 66-88.
137. Lehmann, W. (2002). Attribution of powers and dispute resolution in selected federal systems. Constitutional Affairs Series AFCO 103. Luxembourg: European Parliament.
138. Lehmbruch, G. (1976). Parteienwettbewerb im Bundesstaat. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
139. Lehmbruch, G. (1978). Party and federation in Germany: a developmental dilemma. Government and Opposition 13, 151-77.
140. Lehmbruch, G. (1991). Das konkordanzdemokratische modell in der vergleichenden analyse. In Michalsky, H. (Ed.), Politischer Wandel in Konkordanzdemokratischen Systemen. Vaduz: Liechtenstein Politische Schriften.
141. Lehmbruch, G. (1993). Consociational democracy and corporatism in Switzerland. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 23(2), 43-60.
142. Lehmbruch, G. (2003). Das deutsche Verbändesystem zwischen Unitarismus und Föderalismus. In Mayntz, R. S. and Streek, W. (Eds.), Die Reformierbarkeit der Demokratie, Innovationen und Blockaden. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.
143. Leibfried, S. and Pierson P. (1995). European Social Policy. Washington, D. C.: Brookings.
144. Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review 65, 682-93.
145. Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy. Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
146. Linder, W. (1994). Swiss Democracy: Possible Solutions in Multicultural Societies. London: Macmillan.
147. Linder, W. (1999). Repräsentation, Artikulation und Durchsetzung kantonaler Interessen im Ständerat und im Nationalrat, Studie im Auftrag der Parlamentsdienste der Schweizerischen Bundesversammlung. Bern: Universität Bern.
148. Lowi, T. J. (1964). American business, public policy, case-studies, and political theory. World Politics 16(4), 677-715.
149. Maioni, A. (2002). Health care in the new millenium. In Bakvis, H. S. and Skogstad, G. (Eds.), Canadian Federalism, Performance, Effectiveness and Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
150. Máiz, R., Beramendi, P., and Grau, M. (2002). La federalización del Estado de las automonías: evolución y déficit institutionales. In Subirats, J. and Gallego, R. (Eds.), Viente Anos de Autonomías en Espana: Leyes, Políticas Públicas, Instituciones y Opiníon Pública. Madrid: CIS.
151. Majeed, A. W., Watts, R. L., and Brown, D. M. (Eds.) (2006). The Distribution of Powers and Responsibilities in Federal Countries. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
152. March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1984) The new institutionalism: organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review 78, 734-49.
153. March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering Institutions. New York: The Free Press.
154. March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1995). Democratic Governance. New York: The Free Press.
155. McDowell, B. D. (1997). Advisory commission on intergovernmental relations in 1996: The end of an era. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 27, 111-27.
156. McKay, D. (2001). Designing Europe: Comparative Lessons from the Federal Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
157. McRoberts, K. (1985). Unilateralism, bilateralism and multilateralism: approaches to Canadian federalism. In Simeon, R. (Ed.), Intergovernmental Relations. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
158. McRoberts, K. (1993). Federal structures and the policy process. In Atkinson, M. M. (Ed.), Governing Canada, Institutions and Public Policy. Toronto: Harcourt Brace.
159. Meekison, P. J., Telford, H., and Lazar, H. (2002). The institutions of executive federalism, myths and realities. In Meekison, P. J., Telford, H., and Lazar, H. (Eds.), Canada: The State of the Federation, 2002. Reconsidering the Institutions of Canadian Federalism. Kingston: Institute for Intergovernmental Relations.
160. Menon, A. and Schain, M. (Eds.) (2006). Comparative Federalism: The European Union and the United States in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
161. Minger, T. (2004). Die Geschichte der Konferenz der Kantonsregierungen. In Konferenz der Kantonregierungen (Ed.), 10 Jahre KdK, Standortbestimmung und Ausblick. Bern.
162. Morata, F. (1991). The Spanish regions and the 1993 challenge. Working paper 34. Institut de Ciencies Politiques I Socials, Universitat Autōnoma de Barcelona.
163. Moravcsik, A. (1998). The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. London: UCL Press.
164. Moravcsik, A. (2001). Federalism in the European Union: rhetoric and reality. In Nicolaidis, K. and Howse, R. (Eds.), The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
165. Moreno, L. (1999). Asymmetry in Spain: federalism in the making? In Agranoff, R. (Ed.), Accomodating Diversity in Federal States. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
166. Moreno, L. (2000). The Federalization of Spain. London: Frank Cass.
167. Muchmore, L. R. (1983). Science advice to governors: non-politics in the policy process. In Beyle, T. L. and Muchmore, L. R. (Eds.), Being Governor: A View from the Office. Durham: Duke Press Policy Studies.
168. Nathan, R. P. and Lago, J. R. (1990). Intergovernmental fiscal roles and relations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 509, 36-47.
169. Neidhart, L. (1970). Plebiszit und Pluralitäre Demokratie: Eine Analyse der Funktion des Schweizerischen Gesetzesreferendums. Bern: Francke.
170. Neidhart, L. (2001). Elementare bedingungen der entwicklung des schweizerischen föderalismus. In Benz, A. and Lehmbruch, G. (Eds.), Föderalismus. Analysen in Entwicklungsgeschichtlicher Perspektive (PVS Sonderheft 32). Wiesbaden: Nomos.
171. Nice, D. S. (1987). State participation in interstate compacts. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 17, 69-83.
172. Nicolaidis, K. and Howse, R. (Eds.) (2001). The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the US and the EU. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
173. O'Brennan, J. and Raunio, T. (Eds.) (2007). National Parliaments within the Enlarged European Union: From Victims of Integration to Competitive Actors? Abingdon: Routledge.
174. Olsen, J. P. (1998). Political science and organization theory, parallel agendas but mutual disregard. In Czada, R., Héritier, A., and Keman, H. (Eds.), Institutions and Political Choice: On the Limits of Rationality. Amsterdam: VU University Press.
175. Opeskin, B. R. (2001). Mechanisms for intergovernmental relations in federations. International Science Journal 52, 129-38.
176. O'Reilly, P. L., Inwood, G. J., and Johns, C. (2006). Challenges to Canadian intergovernmental policy capacity: health, environment and trade. Paper read at 64th Annual Conference of the Midwest Political Science Association in Chicago, United States, 22 April.
177. O'Toole, L. J., Jr. (Ed.) (2000). American Intergovernmental Relations. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
178. Painter, M. (1998). Collaborative Federalism: Economic Reform in Australia in the 1990s. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
179. Peters, B. G. (1998). Managing horizontal government: the politics of coordination. Research Paper 21, Canadian Center for Management Development.
180. Peters, B. G. (1999). Institutional Theory in Political Science: The 'New' Institutionalism. London/New York: Pinter.
181. Peters, B. G. and Pierre, J. (2001). Developments in intergovernmental relations: towards multilevel governance. Policy & Politics 29, 131-5.
182. Pierson, P. (2000). The limits of design: explaining institutional origins and change. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration 13, 475-99.
183. Poirier, J. (2002). Formal mechanisms of intergovernmental relations in Belgium. Regional and Federal Studies 12, 24-54.
184. Poirier, J. (2004). Intergovernmental agreements in Canada: at the crossroads between law and politics. In Meekison, J. P., Telford, H., and Lazar, H. (Eds.), Reconsidering the Institutions of Canadian Federalism. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
185. Pollack, M. A. (1994). Creeping competence: the expanding agenda of the European community. Journal of Public Policy 14, 95-145.
186. Prince, M. R. (2001). Canadian federalism and disability policy-making. Canadian Journal of Political Science 34, 792-817.
187. Provost, C. L. (2003). State attorneys general: entrepreneurship, and consumer protection in the new federalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 33, 37-53.
188. Purcell, Edward A. (2007): Originalism, Federalism and the American Constitutional Enterprise: A Historical inquiry, New Haven: Yale University Press.
189. Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games. International Organization 42, 427-60.
190. Quebec Liberal Party. (2001). A Project for Quebec: Affirmation, Autonomy and Leadership. Final Report, Quebec Liberal Party. .
191. Radin, B. and Boase, J. P. (2000). Federalism, political structure, and public policy in the United States and Canada. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 2, 65-89.
192. Reeves, M. M. (1990). The states as polities: reformed, reinvigorated, resourceful. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 509(1), 83-93.
193. Rentzsch, W. (2001). Bifurcated and integrated parties in parliamentary federations: the Canadian case. Working Paper 4 IIFR, Queens University.
194. Rich, R. F. and White, W. D. (1996). Health Policy, Federalism, and the American States. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
195. Riker, W. (1964). Federalism, Origin, Operation, Significance. Boston: Little Brown.
196. Risse-Kappen, T. (1991). Public opinion, domestic structures and foreign policy. World Politics 43, 479-512.
197. Rodden, J. A. (2006). Hamilton's Paradox: The Promise and Perils of Fiscal Federalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
198. Rosenthal, D. B. and Hoefler, J. M. (1989). Competing approaches to the study of American federalism and intergovernmental relations. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 19, 1-23.
199. Rothmayr, C., Varone, F., and Montpetit, E. (2003). Does federalism matter for biopolicies? Switzerland in a comparative perspective. Swiss Political Science Review 9, 109-36.
200. Salisbury, R. H. (1992). The paradox of interest groups in Washington. In Salisbury, R. H. (Ed.), Interests and Institutions. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
201. Sartori, G. (1970). Concept misformation in comparative politics. American Political Science Review 64, 1033-53.
202. Sbragia, A. M. (1993). The European community: a balancing act, Publius: The Journal of Federalism 23, 23-38.
203. Sbragia, A. M. (2006). American federalism and intergovernmental relations. In Rhodes, R. A. W., Binder, S. A., and Rockman, B. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
204. Scharpf, F. W. (1985). Die Politikverflechtungs-Falle: Europäische Integration und deutscher Föderalismus im Verleich. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 26(4), 323-56.
205. Scharpf, F. W. (1988). The joint-decision trap: lessons from German federalism and European integration. Public Administration 66, 239-78.
206. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games Real Actors Play: Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
207. Scharpf, F. W. (2001). What have we learned? Problem-solving capacity of the multilevel European polity. MPIfG Working Paper 01/4, 1-49.
208. Scharpf, F. W. (2005). No exit from the joint decision trap? Can German federalism reform itself? MPIfG Working Paper 05/8.
209. Schlesinger, J. A. (1965). The politics of the executive. In Jacob, H. and Vines, K. N. (Eds.), Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis. Boston/Toronto: Little Brown and Company.
210. Schmidt, V. A. (2006). Democracy in Europe: The EU and National Polities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
211. Schram, S. (2005). The United States of America. In Griffiths, A. L. (Ed.), Handbook of Federal Countries, 2005. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
212. Sciarini, P. (2005). Die Interkantonale Zusammenarbeit ebnet den Weg für die Föderalismusreform. Lausanne: University of Lausanne.
213. Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. London: Sage.
214. Simeon, R. (1972). Federal-Provincial Diplomacy: The Making of Recent Policy in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
215. Simeon, R. (2001). Adaptability and change in federations. International Science Journal 52, 145-52.
216. Simeon, R. (2005). Plus ça change: intergovernmental relations then and now. Policy Options March/April, 84-7.
217. Simeon, R. and Papillon, M. (2006). Canada. In Majeed, A. W., Watts, R. L., and Brown, D. M. (Eds.), The Distribution of Powers and Responsibilities in Federal Countries. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
218. Simmons, J. (2004). Securing the threads of co-operation in the tapestry of intergovernmental relations: does the institutionalization of ministerial conferences matter? In Meekison, P. J., Telford, H., and Lazar, H. (Eds.), Canada: The State of the Federation, 2002: Reconsidering the Institutions of Canadian Federalism. Kingston: Institute for Intergovernmental Relations.
219. Skogstad, G. (2000). Canada: dual and executive federalism: ineffective problem-solving. In D. Braun (Ed.), Public Policy and Federalism. Aldershot: Althenaeum Press.
220. Smiley, D. V. (1987). The Federal Condition in Canada. Toronto: Mc Graw-Hill Ryerson.
221. Smiley, D. V. and Watts, R. L. (1985). Intrastate Federalism in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
222. Steiner, J. (1974). Amicable Agreement versus Majority Rule: Conflict Resolution in Switzerland. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
223. Stiftung, C. H. (2000). Jahresbericht der Konferenz der Kantonsregierungen, Berne.
224. Strøm, K. (1990). Minority Government and Majority Rule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
225. Swenden, W. (2005). What - if anything - can the European Union learn from Belgium federalism and vice versa? Regional and Federal Studies 15, 187-204.
226. Swenden, W. (2006). Federalism and Regionalism in Western Europe: A Comparative and Thematic Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
227. Tannenwald, R. and Cowan, J. (1997). Fiscal capacity, fiscal need, and fiscal comfort among U.S. states: new evidence. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 27, 113-25.
228. Thelen, K. (1999). Historical institutionalism. Comparative Politics: Annual Review of Political Science 2, 369-404.
229. Thorlakson, L. (2003). Comparing federal institutions: power and representation in six federations. West European Politics 2, 1-22.
230. Thorlakson, L. (2007). An institutional explanation of party system congruence: evidence from six federations. European Journal of Political Research 46, 69-95.
231. Thorlakson, L. (2009). Patterns of party integration, influence and autonomy in seven federations. Party Politics 15(2), 157-77.
232. Trees, P. (2005a). Die regionalen Regierungskonferenzen in der Schweiz - Stand und Entwicklung. University of Bern, Bern.
233. Trees, P. (2005b). Zusammenarbeit der Direktorenkonferenzen mit den Regierungskonferenzen, Analyse verschiedener Modelle. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Bern, Bern.
234. Trench, A. (2006). Intergovernmental relations: in search of a theory. In Greer, S. L. (Ed.), Territory, Democracy and Justice: Regionalism and Federalism in Western Democracies. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
235. Tsebelis, G. (1995). Decision making in political systems: veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science 25(3), 289-325.
236. Tsebelis, G. (2002). Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
237. Tsebelis, G. and Money, J. (1997). Bicameralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
238. Vatter, A. (2002) Kantonale Demokratien im Vergleich: Entstehungsgründe, Interaktionen und Wirkungen politischer Institutionen in den Schweizer Kantonen. Opladen: Leske and Budrich.
239. Vatter, A. (2004). Challenges to intergovernmental relations in Switzerland and Japan. Swiss Political Science Review 10, 77-102.
240. Wälti, S. (1996). Institutional reform of federalism: changing the players rather than the rules of the game. Swiss Political Science Review 2(2), 113-41.
241. Wälti, S. (2003). L'effet des rapports financiers sur la dynamique federale: la qualitē mediative du federalisme Suisse. Swiss Political Science Review 9, 91-108.
242. Wälti, S. (2004). How multilevel structures affect environmental policy in industrialized countries. European Journal of Political Research 43, 599-634.
243. Watts, R. L. (1999a). Comparing Federal Systems. Montreal: Mc Gill-Queen's University Press.
244. Watts, R. L. (1999b). The Spending Power in Federal Systems: A Comparative Study. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.
245. Watts, R. L. (2005). Comparing forms of federal partnership. In Karmis, D. and Norman, W. (Eds.), Theories of Federalism: A Reader. London: Macmillan.
246. Wheare, K. C. (1951). Modern Constitutions. London: Oxford University Press.
247. Wibbels, E. (2005). Federalism and the Market: Intergovernmental Conflict and Economic Reform in the Developing World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
248. Winfield, M. S. (2002). Environmental policy and federalism. In Bakvis, H. and Skogstad, G. (Eds.), Canadian Federalism, Performance, Effectiveness and Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
249. Wolpe, B. C. and Levine, B. J. (1996). Lobbying Congress: How the System Works. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Inc.
250. Wright, D. S. (1982). Understanding Intergovernmental Relations. Monterey: Brooks/ Cole.
251. Zimmerman, J. F. (1990). Regulating intergovernmental relations in the 1990s. In Kincaid, J. (Ed.), American Federalism: The Third Century. Newbury Park: Sage.
252. Zimmerman, J. F. (2001). Interstate Cooperation, Compacts and Administrative Agreements. Westport: Praeger.
253. Zimmerman, J. F. (2002). Interstate Relations: The Neglected Dimension of Federalism. Westport: Praeger.