In Finland, the idea of local self-government has been considered strong, and locally arranged services have been the cornerstones of welfare state development. Finnish local government has been described by strong self-government and freedom from central government (Vakkala et al., 2021). In the beginning of 2023, a new level of administration came into force as the so-called wellbeing services counties (WSCs) started their operations with the responsibility for organizing healthcare, social welfare and rescue services which were transferred from municipalities and joint municipal authorities to WSCs. The WSCs are financed and steered by the state. Each WSC has a county council responsible for the county’s activities and finances. County councillors are elected in county elections held in each WSC. The Act on wellbeing services counties also states that each WSC also has the obligation to take care of possibilities for the residents to participate in and influence the decision-making of the WSCs.

WSCs offer a fruitful empirical context to study the formulation of self-government at the regional level. In this paper, we aim to scrutinize how self-government in structured, interpreted and acted upon in Finnish regional government. Previous research has explored the premises of regional self-government of the WSCs by analysing how self-government is interpreted in the government’s proposal concerning the WSCs. This analysis shows that regional self-government is significantly more restricted than local self-government. (Jäntti et al. 2019). In this paper, we build on and move beyond these premises by bringing together the perspectives of decision-makers and officeholders from WSCs and from steering ministries to deepen the understanding of the co-existing and competing interpretations of self-government.

Local self-government is essentially about the freedom, ability, and possibilities to make local decisions and manage local activities. The European Charter of Local Self-Government highlights the idea of local authorities as independent actors, not as the agents of national authorities (Explanatory Report, 1985). In the Charter (§3), “the right and the ability of local authorities” consists of the autonomy, authority and capability of local government with references to the relationship between the central and local levels. Fleurke and Willemse (2006) describe three dimensions of local self-government: how local authorities can determine their own agenda, how central government and other authorities give freedom to local organisations, and how local governments are dependent on other authorities in decision-making. The concepts of autonomy and self-government are mostly used concurrently and combined. Pratchett (2004, 363) defines local autonomy as “freedom from higher authorities, as freedom to achieve particular outcomes and as the reflection of local identity.” Lidström (1998) sees local autonomy as a core feature of a local government, including a circumscribed territory, authoritative power over the citizens and directly elected decision-makers, such as municipal councils or assemblies. Ladner et al. (2019) combine seven theoretically and empirically meaningful dimensions of local autonomy: legal autonomy, political discretion, policy scope, financial autonomy, organisational autonomy, access and non-interference. Ladner et al. (2019) argue that that particular weight should be given to political discretion and financial autonomy. However, Ladner et al. (2016) highlight that there are no agreed upon definition of local autonomy. Moreover, when self-government and autonomy are investigated at regional level, the conceptual definitions are scarce and scattered (Saarts, 2020). Thus, in this paper, we apply the concept of local self-government as a starting point for scrutinizing regional self-government.

In our study, we utilize a qualitative research approach with versatile empirical data collected from Finnish WSCs and ministries. Empirical data is collected through semi-structured thematic interviews from the top management of WSCs (n=17) in spring 2023, senior officeholders from ministries of Finances and Social Affairs and Health (n=10) in spring 2024. Data also includes results from national survey for all elected politicians in WSCs (n=352, 25,5 %) which was conducted in winter 2023–2024.

As preliminary results, it can be said that compared to the local self-government of Finnish municipalities, WSCs seem to represent a very different interpretation of self-government. While one of the aims in creating the WSCs was to guarantee their self-governance, the basic elements of self-government are missing. The first years in operation show that WSCs are strictly steered and financially controlled by central government, specifically by the Ministry of Finances. Instead of being self-governed, WSCs seem to be politically, administratively and financially highly dependent on central government. Interestingly, the viewpoint of ministries highlights the freedom of WSCs to freely use their limited finances to organize their regulated tasks. At the same time, county councillors feel that they have only limited power and possibilities to impact the decision-making of the WSCs.

With our study, we aim to contribute to the scarce literature of regional self-government by bringing the insights from a Finnish case study. Moreover, we see that the insights from Finland are similar as found in the UK context concerning the arm’s length governance in delegating public tasks to semi-autonomous bodies, aiming to insulate decision-making from direct political interference (cf. Hammond et al., 2019).

References:

European Charter of Local Self-Government (66/1991)

Explanatory Report to the European Charter of Local Self-Government 15.10.1985, Council of Europe, European Treaty Series No. 122.

Fleurke, F. & Willemse, R. (2006) Measuring local autonomy: A decision-making approach. Local Government Studies, 32(1), 71-87.

Hammond, J., Speed, E., Allen, P., McDermott, I., Coleman, A., & Checkland, K. (2019). Autonomy, accountability, and ambiguity in arm’s-length meta-governance: the case of NHS England. Public Management Review, 21(8), 1148-1169.

Jäntti, A., Sinervo, L.-M., Vakkala, H. (2019). Maakunnat itsehallinnon outolintuina - paikallinen itsehallinto maakuntauudistuksen (2015-2019) valossa. Hallinnon tutkimus 38 (4), 243-256.

Ladner, A., Keuffer, N., & Baldersheim, H. (2016). Measuring Local Autonomy in 39 Countries (1990–2014). Regional & Federal Studies, 26(3), 321–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2016.1214911

Ladner, A., Keuffer, N., Baldersheim, H., Hlepas, N., Swianiewicz, P., Steyvers, K., ... & Navarro, C. (2019). The local autonomy index (LAI). Patterns of local autonomy in Europe, 213-254.

Lidström, A. (1998), The comparative study of local government systems: a research agenda, Journal f Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, Vol.1, No.1, pp.97–115.

Saarts, T. (2020). Introducing regional self-governments in Central and Eastern Europe: Paths to success and failure. Regional & Federal Studies, 30(5), 625-649.

Pratchett, L. (2004) Local Autonomy, Local Democracy and the ‘New Localism’. Political Studies. Volume 52, 358–375.

Vakkala, H.; Jäntti, A.; Sinervo, L.-M. (2021). Redefining Local Self-Government – Finnish Municipalities Seeking Their Essence. In Bergström, T.; Franzke, J.; Kuhlmann, S.; Wayenberg, E. (eds.). The Future of Local Self-Government. Palgrave Studies in Sub-National Governance. Palgrave-MacMillan.

Summary:

Public theatres in German-speaking countries are experiencing a crisis of legitimacy (dwindling visitor numbers, more heterogeneous society, backward-looking image of theatres). The “Was für ein Theater?” project, funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation: https://www.krisengefuege.theaterwissenschaft.uni-muenchen.de/index.html.), is a comparative analysis of public theatres in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland conducted from a policy-analytical perspective. The central finding is that these once-hallowed public institutions are “going civil.” In recent years, they have transformed into NPOs and, in the process, have increasingly changed their self-image and organizational culture.

Introduction:

Public theaters are an institution in German-speaking countries. Nowhere else does the performing arts have such an infrastructure of theater buildings prominently placed in the urban space, equipped with artistic ensembles, a fixed repertoire, and an extensive apparatus with various trades, from the make-up to the sound and lighting technology. Even the small theaters usually have more than 300 permanent employees. In the case of large houses, it is not uncommon for there to be significantly more than 1,000 employees. However, the city and state theaters are no longer the top dogs of the local cultural offering. Rather, they have suffered a sharp decline in visitor numbers for years, particularly in theater and opera; State and city theaters are considered backward-looking, conservative, and very unresponsive to an increasingly heterogeneous and multicultural society (Wimmer, 2020). Public theaters are in a crisis of legitimacy (Mandel and Zimmer, 2021).

Method:

Against this background, the Münster sub-project of the DFG-funded research group (LMU, 2023) examines how public theatres in German-speaking countries are responding to the crisis of legitimacy under the leitmotif "Was für ein Theater?”. It is about how public theatres in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland adapt to the changed environmental conditions. Whether and to what extent they change their external and internal governance.

The change analysis is carried out against the background or theoretical foil of neo-institutionalism of organizational theory and sociology. According to this, changes tend to occur incrementally and path-dependently, so differences can also be found in common contextual challenges faced in different traditions regarding cooperation with the state (external governance) and the design of the institutions' management (internal governance).

The investigation is designed in three steps. First, cultural governance as a cultural-political tradition and the integration of theaters into the political-administrative context were comparatively examined for each country, supported by literature, and accompanied by expert interviews and from a policy-analytical perspective. In a second step, a largely standardized questionnaire was used in all three countries to determine the legal form and management structure, as well as the composition of management positions and the socio-political function of public theaters in a gender-sensitive manner (full survey). Finally, a sample of theaters was examined more closely. These case studies differ in terms of their size, legal and organizational form, and their artistic profile.

Results:

The study's central finding is that the public theatres in the three countries are undergoing a process of "going civil." In recent years, they have transformed into non-profit organizations and have increasingly changed their self-image and organizational culture. This can be seen in the a) change in the legal and organizational form and spin-off from the public administration, especially in Germany and Austria, b) in the transfer of budget and personnel authority to the theatres, and above all, c) in the clear change in directions theaters have taken to offer programming oriented for urban society, the change in the use of the premises, the expansion of the performance spaces, and the change in performance practices.

Despite the common general trend, a comparison of the development in the three countries shows differences. For example, theatres in Switzerland are most strongly embedded in civil society (Marx, 2018), while theatres in Austria are still more oriented towards the state; in contrast, theatres in Germany occupy a middle position, with a north-south divide. The further south, the closer the theatre in Germany is to the state (Obuch, 2023). This can be explained, among other things, by the countries' historical background and the theatres' resulting financing. While, for example, theatres in Switzerland were often founded directly by the citizens as a cooperative or stock corporation, the Austrian theatres, in Vienna in particular, still have a strong courtly tradition. They receive special financing from the Austrian state (Federal Ministry of Arts, Culture, Civil Service and Sport 2022), while Swiss theatres traditionally have high box office quotas of their own and, out of a republican tradition, make their citizens more accountable from the outset (Deutscher Bühnenverein, 2022).

Discussion:

The institution of theatre, characterized by many crises in recent years, is moving with the times. By stepping out of public administration and moving towards urban societies, theatre no longer exclusively caters to the so-called classic bourgeoisie but instead seeks to widen its audience. There are also numerous indications that public theatres have learned sustainably from their competitors, the theatre-makers of the der Freien Szene (independent theatres) and are increasingly entrusting them with management positions. In addition to protecting and preserving artistic freedoms, public theatres today increasingly see themselves as companies with complex structures and objectives, the management of which requires strategic orientation and management know-how. Courses of study in cultural and theatre management accompany and accelerate this trend. The dusty city and state theatres, which often appealed mainly to an educated middle-class audience, are transforming into non-profit organizations that try to connect with all parts of the increasingly heterogeneous urban societies. They seek to draw a wider audience with new formats and programs to encourage a new generation of dedicated theatregoers. The public theatre, once backward-looking and partly believed to be dead after the Corona pandemic, is fighting its way back into the middle of society with new organizational forms, inclusive programming, and the self-image as a mediator in a colorful culture.

Bibliography:

Bundesministerium für Kunst, Kultur, öffentlicher Dienst und Sport (Hg.) (2022): Kunst- und Kulturbericht 2021. Wien.

Deutscher Bühnenverein (Ed.) (2022). Theaterstatistik 2019/2020: Die wichtigsten Wirtschaftsdaten der Theater, Orchester und Festspiele (Auflage, revidierte Ausgabe). Köln: Deutscher Bühnenverein Bundesverband dt. Theater.

LMU (2023): Das Forschungsprojekt. Krisengefüge der Künste – Institutionelle Transformationsdynamiken in den darstellenden Künsten der Gegenwart (FOR 2734). Online verfügbar unter https://www.krisengefuege.theaterwissenschaft.uni-muenchen.de/das_forschungs projekt/index.html, zuletzt geprüft am 20.11.2023.

Mandel, Birgit; Zimmer, Annette (Hg.) (2021): Cultural Governance. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

Marx, L. (2018). Who governs culture? Actors, federalism and expertise in Swiss regional cultural policy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 26(3), 365–382.

Obuch, K. (2023). Cultural Governance? Kulturpolitik und öffentliche Theater in den deutschen Bundesländern im Vergleich: Working Paper. Zugriff am 20.11.2023, aus: https://www.krisengefuege.theaterwissenschaft.uni-muenchen.de/publikationen1/working-papers/working-papersphase-2/cultural_governance/index.html.

Wimmer, Michael (2020): Es war einmal: „Kulturpolitik als Fortsetzung von Sozialpolitik: Über die Notwendigkeit des Neustarts des Kulturbetriebs. Beitrag für den Momentum Kongress.