Introduction - Comparing Environmental Policies in 16 Countries - page 10

control regions. Federalism has two levels of government over a single
geographical area. A federal system inherently has conflicts between the
two levels. Moreover, the relationship between the two levels evolves over
the years, and may be different in the environmental arena than in others
such as education or welfare. For example, in the United States, a major
debate leading up to the Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Clean Water Act
of 1972 was the proper division between Washington and the 50 states.
The resolution was a hybrid, whereby the national level set detailed stan-
dards and program, which were implemented by the states, which received
money for doing so. In contrast in the federal systems of Canada and
Australia, more authority resides at the provincial-state level.
The alternative to a federal government is a unitary one. France is the
best example. Its national government in Paris legislates and adminis-
ters laws and programs directly. For example, the national government
directly appoints the prefects (heads) of the departments (provinces); they
are not elected governors as in the United States or premiers as in Canada
or Australia. Around the world almost half of the people live in federa-
tions as opposed to unitary states. The biggest is India with more than a
billion people. Russia, Brazil, and Mexico are also federations. Examples
of unitary governments are Japan, Denmark, and Italy. Many are small,
but China is in this category.
A federal versus a unitary structure is not the same as decentralization
versus centralization. Even a unitary government like France needs to
have geographic divisions. Indeed, any government larger than, say, a few
hundred square miles, needs to have branch offices. The difference lies in
the legal authority of the national government. While the general rule is
that a country is either unitary or a federation, this dichotomy is not 100%
exact. Some like Sweden do not describe themselves as federal but give a
lot of autonomy to their counties. While many countries like Germany
and Brazil have the word “federal” in their official names, none have the
word “unitary.” Moreover, there is a slight trend toward becoming more
federal. Belgium used to be unitary but now is federal. In the late 1990s,
the United Kingdom decided to become a bit less united by giving limited
rights to Scotland and Wales. A federal structure is an inherent source of
conflict. Of course, this does not mean a unitary government will have
no conflict between the center and the periphery. The extent of cultural
and social diversity has the potential for conflict, but in practice, envi-
ronmentalists tend to be quite skilled in bridging these gaps. Although