Internet Era will make even clearer a factor which seems to escape to the
debate Devolution: there is no optimal institutional configuration, not a
given distribution of power among different institutional (local, regional,
national, global) levels that we can consider invariable in time and space.
In Time because technologies change continuously the optimal level at which
it is convenient to allocate a given political activity (and with it the needed
human, financial resources and regulatory levers) In Space because what appears
to be reasonable in a given context will not be so in a different one and, for
instance, it is absolutely obvious that, for instance, two Regions within the
same State or two municipalities within same Region can have a totally different
performance. Such a simple fact seems to be ignored within the never ending
political positioning along the different hypotheses of devolution.. We keep
ignoring that the key to modernity is not the difference between centralisation
and devolution but between rigidity and flexibility.
This could appear just theory but, in fact, we all know that it is not true,
that if we ignore it our thinking will be wrong in its own basics.
The question of ICT applied to local governments can be paradigmatic. How
will ICT change the bargaining power of locals vs centrals? Answer is not a
simple one: it depends on the combination of two diverse driving forces which
go in opposite direction. And such a combination will continuously change and
greatly differ according to the ability of the human beings to cope with the
innovation.
The Power of Information
First driving of change is that the Internet is likely to make significantly
smaller the biggest competitive advantage of Central Power. Thesis sounds straightforward
1) Information is power and central government used to have a competitive
advantage as opposed to local government because of a natural easier access
to such a source of power however
2) Internet makes costs of accessing (and sharing and processing) much
smaller therefore
3) Internet does change in favour of local level the optimal distribution
of power and competences.
We can even make an example. Let’s take for instance the crucial case of establishing
and controlling the budget of a State. There was a time when this could be achieved
only centrally and this was based mainly because of how information distribution
needed to work in a pre internet age. Policy maker needed to receive all the
information on taxation and expenses of the previous year and this could be
done only sending all numbers to a single place which could gather all data
and centrally elaborate the Budget. There was simply no other option. Internet
is, in this case, a breakthrough because it has created an entirely new possibility
to have everybody sending to everybody else its own data, and thus thousands
(assuming thousands being the number of Government cost centres) times thousands
of communications be circulated at cost and time close to nil. And not only
we have suddenly increased of many folds our capacity to communicate, we have
also multiplied by a very big factor our capacity of processing information:
we can, in fact, even replace the Central Budget Office numbers crunching with
a software which can incorporate political criteria (and constraints) into algorithmes.
In other words it is now technically possible for the budget to be established
without anybody being The Centre. It is, as we all know, a technical possibility
very far from getting real, but should we even talk of a mere possibility the
change is still very big[1].
However if theory sounds relatively unquestionable, reality does not follow
promptly. Both because of problems of skills and structure and because of information
overload. Moreover problems are even more “structural” and they have to do with
a parallel gradual disappearance of some of the fundamental factors upon which
the very local communities were based.
Stronger local governments within vanishing local communities
If ICT will probably mean an overall shift of power from central to local
administrations, they will seriously challenge local governments and make them
compete among them for customer (citizen) base. Locally based PAs who won’t
realise it, may even find their (Inter) Net balance on the negative side.
Internet will, in fact, sooner or later shift information power not only from
central to local level, but also from government itself to individuals. Healthcare,
for instance, is one of the most relevant example of how public services dynamics
are going to change. The Internet will mean at least the possibility of much
more information and choice for everybody. Citizens will be informed on the
offering of healthcare on a national, if not international, level and they will
ask increasingly more for the possibility to choose and this will mean a significant
increase in the number of people demanding to have their public services away
from their home base. Therefore, a gradual disappearance of the healthcare providers
whose performance is consistently below the average; a gradual focusing and
specialisation of health care takers[2]. (hospitals and doctors
alike) in the areas (could be specific pathologies) where their competitive
advantage lay. We will probably see the end of the principle by which every
citizen is supposed to have the right to access basic services within a certain
number of miles and the change of such a fundamental will imply to radically
redesign the format itself of the National Health Services. Such a reform will
imply much more competition (and partnership) within public sector entities
which operate on a local basis and a gradual but huge reallocation of human
and financial resources
****
So what is going to happen to Power layout? Is status and power of a given
city council or a certain Local Health Care Unit going to increase or be reduced?
Will be greater the driving force beyond the vertical decrease of accessing
information at local level or the competition driven by the demand of the citizens
free to have their public service provided away from their home base? In fact,
both factors will have their profound effect in the way of building up Network
Institutions. We will most likely see at the same time an erosion of power (and
eventually even of the status) of central Institutions and at the same time
local governments will increasingly compete (or partner) among them to get higher
share of citizens asking for services. Times ahead will be, in any event, times
of great opportunities and of challenges to all Institutions: they will soon
discover that they do not hold any more a sort of divine right to make decisions
in the name of everybody else. We will probably still have eighteenth century
style debates whether current level of decentralisation is the right one, but
reality will continue to go in a different direction. And Networked PAs will,
probably, be - for all the above mentioned reasons – an exciting place to be,
the place where much of the change Network Society requires will eventually
happen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] And, in fact, extremely concrete
consequences may follow sooner than we could expect if technological changes
are coupled with political and economic transformations: and even the Budget
- which still one of the most important moment within Modern States life – may
be challenged (not only by ICTs but also by things like globalisation and Euro)
and radically change its nature.
[2] With again very important
changes for consolidated local Institutions like the local hospital or
the general pratictioner which will all have to seriously rethink their professional
focus and geographical span.