Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Conference
Location
About APSA
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Session Submission Type: Roundtable
As an idea and a system of governance, federalism involves political communities – or groups of people sharing distinctive collective bonds living in a broader society – exercising self-rule enabled in part by a division of powers among orders of government while also coming together to practice shared rule under the auspices of a common political architecture. Shared rule carries considerable pragmatic and normative implications. Pragmatically, shared rule provides mechanisms to address the structural reality of interdependence in all federations. Decisions of one authority often affect conditions for others. Problems that require public action rarely fall into the jurisdictional boundaries entrenched in a federal constitution. Normatively, when working effectively, shared rule holds a federation together and elevates self-rule, as the partners of a federation can influence, engage, and participate in collective decisions while reinforcing the collective legitimacy of the federal union itself. Despite its significance, however, the meaning, expression, and implementation of shared rule remain murky and ambiguous in theory and practice.
This roundtable will examine the normative foundations, conceptualization, operationalization, and policy implications of shared rule in federations. Focused on Canada but presenting comparative perspectives primarily with the United States, the roundtable will involve thinking about issues of representation, governance, and policy making in federations in contexts where formal mechanisms of intergovernmental relations tend to not involve all of the political communities of a federation.