Conceptualising Australia's tradition of pragmatic federalism

Australian Journal of Political Science

Volumn 49, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 677-693

  Smullen, Amanda ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Australia; experimentalist governance; federalism; institutions; performance regulation; semi autonomous agencies

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920116164     PISSN: 10361146     EISSN: 1558108X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2014.964660     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Arrowsmith, J., Sisson, K. and Marginson, P. 2004. What can ‘benchmarking’ offer the open method of coordination? Journal of European Public Policy 11: 311–28. doi: 10.1080/1350176042000194458
2. Blatter, J. K. 2001. Debordering the world of states: Towards a multi-level system in Europe and a multi-polity system in North America? Insights from border regions. European Journal of International Relations 7: 175–209. doi: 10.1177/1354066101007002002
3. Blatter, J. 2004. From ‘spaces of place’ to ‘spaces of flows’? Territorial and functional governance in cross-border regions in Europe and North America. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28: 530–48
4. Blatter, J. 2006. Geographic scale and functional scope in metropolitan governance reform: Theory and evidence from Germany. Journal of Urban Affairs 28: 121–50. doi: 10.1111/j.0735-2166.2006.00264.x
5. Bouckaert, G. and Halligan, J. 2008. Managing performance: International comparisons. New York: Routledge.
6. Carpenter, D. 2001. The forging of bureaucratic autonomy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7. Carroll, P. 2012. Policy transfer over time: A case of growing complexity. International Journal of Public Administration 35: 658–66. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2012.689154
8. Carroll, P. and Head, B. 2010. Regulatory reform and the management of intergovernmental relations in Australia. Australian Journal of Political Science 45: 407–24. doi: 10.1080/10361146.2010.509310
9. Chiti, E. 2004. Decentralization and integration into the community administrations: A new perspective on European agencies. European Law Journal 10: 402–38. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0386.2004.00223.x
10. Chiti, E. 2013. European agencies’ rulemaking: Powers, procedures and assessment. European Law Journal 19: 93–110. doi: 10.1111/eulj.12015
11. Cohen, A. 2010. Governance legalism: Hayek and Sabel on reason and rules, organization and law. Wisconsin Law Review 2: 357–87.
12. Craven, G. 2014. The new centralism and the collapse of the conservative constitution. Paper presented at the Department of the Senate Occasional Lecture Series, Parliament House, October, Canberra, Australia.
13. De Bruijn, H. 2007. Managing performance in the public sector. New York: Routledge.
14. DeBurca, G. 2010. Stumbling into experimentalism: The EU anti-discrimination regime. In C. Sabel and J. Zeitlin, eds. Experimentalist governance in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Dewey, J. 1927 [1954]. The public and its problems. New York: Henry Holt & Company.
16. Dorf, M. and Sabel, C. 1998. A constitution of democratic experimentalism. Columbia Law Review 98: 267–473. doi: 10.2307/1123411
17. Ergas, H. 2013. Tony Abbott should flesh out plan to fix federalism. The Australian 7 January. . Consulted 8 October 2014
18. Fenna, A. 2012. Centralising dynamics in Australian federalism. Australian Journal of Politics and History 58: 580–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8497.2012.01654.x
19. Galligan, B., ed. 1988. Comparative state policies. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
20. Haas, P. 1989. Do regimes matter? Epistemic communities and Mediterranean pollution control. International Organization 43: 377–403. doi: 10.1017/S0020818300032975
21. Hollander, R. 2012. Using regulation to effect constitutional change in higher education. In P. Kildea, A. Lynch and G. Williams, eds. Tomorrow's federation. Sydney: Federation Press.
22. Hollander, R. and Patapan, H. 2007. Pragmatic federalism: Australian federalism from Hawke to Howard. Australian Journal of Public Administration 66: 280–97. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2007.00542.x
23. Jones, S. 2008. Cooperative federalism? The case of the ministerial council on education, employment and training and youth affairs. Australian Journal of Public Administration 67: 161–72. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2008.00579.x
24. Kay, A. 2011. Evidence-based policy-making: The elusive search for rational public administration. Australian Journal of Public Administration 70: 236–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2011.00728.x
25. Kay, A. 2013. Multi-level governance in Australian federalism: The open method of coordination in open economy policy-making. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Public Policy, 26–28 June, Grenoble, France.
26. Lewis, J. and Triantafillou, P. 2012. From performance measurement to learning: A new source of government overload? International Review of Administrative Sciences 78: 597–614. doi: 10.1177/0020852312455993
27. Lynch, A. 2014. Abbott draws up new battlelines in the fight over federalism. The Conversation, 16 May.
28. Marks, G. and Hooghe, L. 2004. Contrasting visions of multi-level governance. In I. Bache and M. Flinders, eds. Multi-level governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Matthews, R. 1977. Innovations and developments in Australian federalism. Publius 7: 9–19.
30. Moynihan, D. 2008. The dynamics of performance management. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
31. Neubert, S. 2008. Dewey's pluralism reconsidered – Pragmatist and constructivist perspectives on diversity and difference. In J. Garrison, ed. Reconstructing democracy, Recontextualizing Dewey. New York: State University of New York Press.
32. Ostrom, V. 1979. Dewey and federalism: So near and yet so far. Publius 9: 87–101.
33. Painter, M. 1996. Federal theory and modern Australian federalism. In J. Halligan, ed. Public administration under scrutiny. Canberra: Centre for Research in Public Sector Management, University of Canberra.
34. Painter, M. 1998. Collaborative federalism: Economic reform in Australia in the 1990s. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Painter, M. 2001. Multi-level governance and Australian the emergence of collaborative federal institutions in Australia. Policy & Politics 29: 137–50. doi: 10.1332/0305573012501260
36. Parkin, A. 1988. Housing policy. In B. Galligan, ed. Comparative state policies. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
37. Parkin, A. 2003. The states, federalism and political science: A fifty-year appraisal. Australian Journal of Public Administration 62: 101–12. doi: 10.1111/1467-8497.00329
38. Parkin, A. and Anderson, G. 2007. The Howard government regulatory federalism and the transformation of commonwealth-state relations. Australian Journal of Political Science 42: 295–314
39. Power, M. 1997. The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. Sabel, C. 2012. Dewey, democracy and democratic experimentalism. Contemporary Pragmatism 9: 35–55.
41. Sabel, C. and Zeitlin, J. 2010. Experimentalist governance in the European Union: Towards a new architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42. Sabel, C. and Zeitlin, J. 2012. Experimentalist governance. In D. Levi-Faur, ed. Oxford handbook of governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press
43. Sawer, G. 1969. Modern federalism. London: Watts.
44. Suvarierol, S. 2008. Beyond the myth of nationality: Analyzing networks within the European Commission. West European Politics 31: 701–24. doi: 10.1080/01402380801905975
45. Van Thiel, S. and Leeuw, F. 2002. The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Performance & Management Review 25: 267–81. doi: 10.2307/3381236
46. Wettenhall, R. 1985. Intergovernmental agencies: Lubricating the federal system. Current Affairs Bulletin 61: 28–35.
47. Whitford, J. 2002. Pragmatism and the untenable dualism of means and ends: Why rational choice theory does not deserve paradigmatic privilege. Theory and Society 31: 325–63. doi: 10.1023/A:1016232404279