the task has been undertaken within several countries, but the challenge remains to
provide a global comparative framework in which these studies can beWtted.
What might that more global take reveal? TheWrst thing it would do is complete
the orientation away from formal focus on the powers of diVerent local govern-
ment systems to a more substantive focus on their capacity to get things done.
Studying local government in developmental states such as South Korea, newly
developed states such as India, and developing states in Africa, Asia, and Latin
America brings strongly into focus theWnancial and human resources as well as the
blending regime power that is available to local government rather than what
is written in the constitution. These considerations also apply to the former
Communist regimes. The second area that is brought into focus is the quality of
the democracy that is established at a local level and the nature of the relationship
between local politicians and citizens. Too often in the cosy world of Western local
government it is assumed that local government is good government and one that
automatically engages the citizen. That assumption is invalid in mature Western
democracies and certainly does not apply in the new democracies.
Comparative local governance faces further diYculties when trying to address
the more new institutionalist concern with the way in which rules of the game and
bridging institutional frameworks are established in order to move formal institu-
tional resources into direction and practice on the ground. The interest in regime
literature signals the concern of scholars in a variety of settings with these issues
and again valuable insights and understandings have emerged, especially in
the analysis of more mature democracies. There are some problems with the
conceptualization of regimes. We need a better understanding of what constitutes
a regime (how solid and how long living does it need to be?). We require a better
framework for identifying regime types. We need to understand what binds
regimes together and what might lead them to break up. But the greatest diYculties
lie, thus far, in the inadequate way in which comparative studies in theWeld have
developed. A range of faults common to comparative analysis have certainly been
in evidence in some of the comparative debate about regimes. These faults can be
corrected and with improved conceptualization there is hope for development in
this new institutionalist element of theWeld as well.
References
Bassett,K. 1996. Partnerships, business elites and urban politics: new forms of governance
in an English city?Urban Studies, 33 : 539 – 55.
Batley, R. and Stoker,G. 1991 .Local Government in Europe. London: Macmillan.
Bennett, R. J. (ed.) 1989 .Territory and Administration in Europe. London: Pinter.
—— 1993 .Local Government in the New Europe. London: Belhaven.
comparative local governance 511