This file is to be used only for a purpose specified by Palgrave Macmillan, such as checking proofs, preparing an index, reviewing, endorsing or planning coursework/other institutional needs. You may store and print the file and share it with others helping you with the specified purpose, but under no circumstances may the file be distributed or otherwise made accessible to any other third parties without the express prior permission of Palgrave Macmillan. Please contact rights@palgrave.com if you have any queries regarding use of the file. 9780230_221246_13_cha12.tex 4/9/2008 16: 48 Page 208 PROOF 12 Local/regional Governments and Centre–periphery Relations in the Fifth Republic Patrick Le Galès and Gilles Pinson During most of the Fifth Republic the conventional wisdom related to centre– periphery relations, or in more recent terms, the organization of local and regional governments, stated that France was highly centralized. The com- mon sense about France is still that the relationships between ‘Paris’, i.e. the central power on one hand, and the ‘provinces’, i.e. local powers, have been and remain asymmetrical, which is no surprise within a uni- tary state. The central state is still a very important actor in public policies and economic development but the French institutional system has been transformed through a decentralization process during the last 25 years. There is no unequivocal account of what the Fifth Republic has brought about or changed in the field of local government and centre–periphery relations. On one hand, the regime contributed to the reinforcement of the centralization and of the state control on peripheries. Indeed, the new Republic was founded in a context within which the formal institu- tional organization was centralized and the room for manoeuvre of local governments in policy-making very narrow. However, thanks to the possi- bility of holding multiple offices at local and national levels, local elected officials were able to control national policies and influence their implemen- tation. The new regime was able to marginalize the local elected officials in policy-making. It strengthened central state control on policy design and implementation through the reinforcement of the central bureaucratic apparatus and the reassertion of the power of the prefect, the state local representative, on local elected officials and in policies implementation. On the other hand, the tide of centralization went on the ebb; the Fifth Republic paved the way for the emergence of new territorial powers, the regions and large cities that have gradually become important institutions in policy-making and public investment. The Fifth Republic was also changed by a major set of decentralization reforms (which began with the 1982–83 decentralization Acts) quite unique in the French institutional history. Since the constitutional reform of 2003, the first article of the Constitution states that the organization of the republic is decentralized. The Republic has also 208