Editing Federalism

{{Short description|Political concept}}
{{About|the mode of government|other uses}}
[[File:Map of unitary and federal states.svg|thumb|upright=1.5|
{{legend|#00e000|[[Federation|Federal states]]: regional separation of powers}}
{{legend|#0000b0|[[Unitary state]]s: regional integration of powers}}]]
{{Politics sidebar|expanded=Subseries}}

'''Federalism''' is a mode of [[government]] that combines a general level of government  (a '''central''' or '''federal''' government) with a '''regional''' level of sub-unit governments (e.g., [[province]]s, [[State (sub-national)|state]]s, [[Canton (administrative division)|canton]]s, [[territorial|territories]], etc.), while dividing the powers of governing between the two levels of governments. Two illustrative examples of federated countries—one of the world's oldest federations, and one recently organized—are [[Australia #Government and politics|Australia]] and [[Federated States of Micronesia|Micronesia]].

[[Johannes Althusius]] (1563–1638), is considered the father of modern federalism, along with [[Montesquieu]]. In 1603, Althusius first described the bases of this [[political philosophy]] in his ''Politica Methodice Digesta, Atque Exemplis Sacris et Profanis Illustrata''. By 1748, in his treatise ''[[The Spirit of Law]]'', Montesquieu (1689-1755) observed various examples of federalist governments: in corporate societies, in the ''polis'' bringing villages together, and in cities themselves forming [[confederations]].<ref>{{cite book | last=Grabill | first=Stephen J. | date=2013 | chapter=Althusius in context: A biographical and historical introduction | editor-last=Althusius | editor-first=Johannes | title=On law and power | series=Sources in early modern economics, ethics, and law | translator-last=Veenstra | translator-first=Jeffrey J. | publication-place=Grand Rapids, Michigan | publisher=[[Christian's Library Press]] | isbn=978-1-938948-59-6 | page=xx}}</ref> In the [[modern era]] Federalism was first adopted by a union of the states of the [[Old Swiss Confederacy]]{{sfn|Forsyth|1981|p=18}} as of the mid-14th century.

Federalism differs from [[Confederation|confederalism]], where the ''central government is created subordinate'' to the regional states—and is notable for its ''regional-separation'' of governing powers (e.g., in the [[United States]], the [[Articles of Confederation]] as the general level of government of the original [[Thirteen Colonies]]; and, later, the [[Confederate States of America]]<!-- The relevance of the CSA to this seems unclear. -->). And federalism also differs from the [[unitary state]], where the ''regional level is subordinate'' to the central/federal government, even after a devolution of powers—and is notable for ''regional-integration of governing powers'', (e.g., the [[United Kingdom]]).{{sfn|Wheare|1946|pp=31–22}} 

Federalism is at the midpoint of variations on the pathway (or spectrum) of ''regional-integration or regional-separation''. It is bordered on the increasing-separation side by confederalism, and on the increasing-integration side by devolution within a unitary state; (see "pathway" graphic).<ref>{{crossreference|selfref=no|See the diagram in {{slink|#Overview}}, below.}}</ref><ref>{{multiref2|{{cite book | last=Diamond | first=Martin | year=1961 | chapter=''The Federalist''{{'}}s view of federalism | chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/essaysinfederali0000geor/page/22 | editor-last=Benson | editor-first=George Charles Sumner | title=Essays in federalism | publisher=[[Institute for Studies in Federalism]] | publication-place=Claremont, California | oclc=615755 | pages=21–64, at p. 22}}|{{cite book | last=Downs | first=William M. | date=2011 | chapter=Comparative federalism, confederalism, unitary systems | doi=10.4135/9781412979351.n20 | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IR1GCphhU7EC&pg=PA168 | editor-last=Ishiyama | editor-first=John | editor-last2=Breuning | editor-first2=Marijke | title=21st century political science: A reference handbook | volume=1 | publication-place=Thousand Oaks, California | publisher=Sage Publications | isbn=978-1-4129-6901-7 | pages=168-176, at pp. 168–170}}|{{cite book | last1=Hueglin | first1=Thomas O. | last2=Fenna | first2=Alan | year=2006 | chapter=Federal principles, federal organization | title=Comparative federalism: A systematic inquiry | edition=1st | publication-place=Peterborough, Ontario, Canada | publisher=[[Broadview Press]] | isbn=978-1-55111-410-1 | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kTDQ5A1dHXUC&pg=PA31 | pages=31-84, at p. 31}}}}</ref>

Some characterize the [[European Union]] as a pioneering example of federalism in a multi-state setting—with the concept termed a "federal union of states", as situated on the ''pathway'' (spectrum) of ''regional-integration or regional-separation''.<ref>{{cite journal | last=Law | first=John | date=2013 | title=How can we define federalism? | journal=Perspectives on Federalism | volume=5 | issue=3 | publication-place=Turin, Italy | publisher=Centro Studi sul Federalismo | pages=88-120, at p. 104 | issn=2036-5438 | url=http://www.on-federalism.eu/attachments/169_download.pdf | url-status=dead | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150715021101/http://www.on-federalism.eu/attachments/169_download.pdf | archive-date=2015-07-15}}<br />
This author identifies two distinct federal forms, where before only one was known, based upon whether [[sovereignty]] (conceived in its core meaning of ultimate authority) resides in the whole (in one people) or in the parts (in many peoples). This is determined by the absence or presence of a unilateral right of secession for the parts. The structures are termed, respectively, the federal state (or federation) and the federal union of states (or federal union).</ref><ref>{{cite book | last1=Usherwood | first1=Simon McDougall | last2=Pinder | first2=John | date=2018-01-25 | title=The European Union: A very short introduction | edition=4th | series=Very short introductions | publisher=Oxford University Press | doi=10.1093/actrade/9780198808855.001.0001 |isbn=978-0-19-880885-5}}</ref>

Examples of federalism today, i.e., the [[federation]] of a central/federal government with regional sub-unit governments, include:  [[Argentina]], [[Australia]], [[Austria]], [[Belgium]], [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]], [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], [[Ethiopia]], [[Germany]], [[India]], [[Iraq]], [[Malaysia]], [[Mexico]], [[Federated States of Micronesia|Micronesia]], [[Nepal]], [[Nigeria]], [[Pakistan]], [[Russia]], [[Somalia]], [[South Sudan]], [[Sudan]], [[Switzerland]], the [[United Arab Emirates]], the [[United States]], and [[Venezuela]]. 

==Overview==
===Etymology===
[[File:The pathway of regional integration or separation.svg|thumb|left|upright=2.2|The pathway of regional integration or regional separation]]

The&nbsp;terms&nbsp;"federalism"&nbsp;and&nbsp;"confederalism" share a root in the [[Latin]] word ''[[foedus]]'', meaning "[[treaty]], pact or [[wikt:covenant|covenant]]". Until the late eighteenth century their two early meanings were essentially the same: a simple league among [[sovereign states]], based on a treaty; (thus, initially the two  were synonyms). It was in this sense that [[James Madison]] referred to the new [[Constitution of the United States|US Constitution]] as "neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both"—i.e., constituting neither a single large unitary state nor a league/confederation among several small states, but a hybrid of the two forms—according to Madison; [[Federalist No.39|"The Federalist No. 39"]].<ref>Madison, James, Hamilton, Alexander and Jay, John (1987) ''The Federalist Papers'', Penguin, Harmondsworth, p. 259.</ref> 

Notably, in the course of the nineteenth century in the United States, the meaning of federalism shifted, now referring uniquely to the novel compound-political form established at the [[Philadelphia Convention|Philadelphia Constitution Convention]]—while the meaning of confederalism remained as a league of states.{{sfn|Law|2012|p=544}}

===History===
In a narrow sense, federalism refers to the mode in which the [[body politic]] of a state is organized internally—and this is the meaning most often used in modern times. Political scientists, however, use the term federalism in a much broader sense, referring instead to a "multi-layer or pluralistic concept of social and political life".<ref>{{cite book |last=Bulmer |first=Elliot |date=2017 | orig-year=2015 | title=Federalism |edition=2nd | url=https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/federalism-primer.pdf#page=12 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210328062951/https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/federalism-primer.pdf#page=12 |archive-date=2021-03-28 |url-status=live |series=International IDEA Constitution-Building Primer | volume=12 | publication-place=Stockholm |publisher=[[International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance]] | isbn=978-91-7671-117-0 | page=12}}</ref>

The first forms of federalism took place in ancient times, in the form of alliances between tribes or city states. According to Historian of world federalist movement, Joseph Baratta, his colleagues generally begin the history of federalism with the [[Twelve Tribes of Israel|Israelite tribal confederacy]] led by military leader called [[Hebrew Bible judges|Judge]] in c.1200 – c.1000 BC. Some examples from the seventh to second century BC were the [[Amphictyonic league|Archaic League]], the [[Aetolian League|Aetolic League]], the [[Peloponnesian League]], and the [[Delian League]]. An early ancestor of federalism was the [[Achaean League]] in [[Hellenistic Greece]]. Unlike the [[Greek city states]] of [[Classical Greece]], each of which insisted on keeping its complete independence, changing conditions in the Hellenistic period drove city states to band together even at the cost of surrendering part of their sovereignty. Several leagues of states existed in the contemporary China. Subsequent unions of states included the first and second [[Old Swiss Confederacy|Swiss Confederations]] (1291–1798 and 1815–48); the [[Dutch Republic|United Provinces of the Netherlands]] (1579–1795); the [[German Confederation|German Bund]] (1815–66); the first American union, known as the [[Articles of Confederation|Confederation of the United States of America]] (1781–89); and the second American union, formed as the [[Constitution of the United States|United States of America]] (1789-present).{{sfn|Forsyth|1981|pp=18, 25, 30, 43, 53, 60}}

===Political theory===
Modern federalism is a political system that (nominally) is based upon operating under [[democracy|democratic]] rules and institutions; and where governing powers are shared between a country's national and provincial/state governments. However, the term ''[[federalist]]'' comprises various political practices that differ in important details among the (so-called) federalist nations—some of which are ''democratic in name only'' (e.g., modern [[Russia]])—leaving the terms "federalist", "federalism", "federation", etc., dependent on context. And, because the term ''federalization'' also proclaims distinctive political processes, its use also depends on context.{{sfn|Broschek|2016|p=23–50}}

Typically, political theory today discusses two main types of the federalization process:
* integrative,{{sfn|Gerven|2005|p=35, 392}} ''(or aggregative)'' federalization,{{sfn|Broschek|2016|pp=27–28, 39}}which encompasses several political processes, including: 1) transforming a [[confederation]] into a federation; 2) incorporating non-federated population(s) into an existing federation; or 3) integrating a non-federated population by creating a new or revised federation.
* devolutive,{{sfn|Gerven|2005|p=35, 392}} ''(or dis-aggregative)'' federalization:{{sfn|Broschek|2016|pp=27–28,39–41, 44}} 1) transforming a [[unitary state]] into a federation.

===Reasons for adoption===
According to [[Daniel Ziblatt]], there are four competing theoretical explanations  for adopting a federal system:
# Ideational theories, which hold: that among subunit population(s), a greater ideological commitment to [[Decentralization|decentralist]] ideas makes federalism more likely to be sought and adopted.
# Cultural-historical theories: that in societies with [[Multiculturalism|culturally]] or ethnically fragmented populations, federalized subunits are more likely to be favored and adopted.
# "[[Social contract]]" theories: that federalism emerges via a bargaining process between the center and a periphery (subunit)—where the center is not powerful enough to dominate the periphery, but the periphery is not powerful enough to secede from the center, (e.g., modern [[Iraq]] re [[Kurdistan]]).
# "Infrastructural power" theories: that federalism is likely to emerge for the subunit population that already has highly developed infrastructures, (e.g., they already are a constitutional, parliamentary, and administratively modernized state).<ref>{{cite book |first=Daniel |last=Ziblatt |url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8201.html |title=Structuring the State: The Formation of Italy and Germany and the Puzzle of Federalism |publisher=[[Princeton University Press]] |date=2008 |isbn=9780691136493 |access-date=2017-03-11 |archive-date=2017-03-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170307232537/http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8201.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

[[Immanuel Kant]] noted that "the problem of setting up a state can be solved even by a nation of devils"<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=v7v3CwAAQBAJ&pg=PT79 |title=Kant: Political Writings |first=H.S. |last=Reiss |date=2013 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=9781107268364}}</ref>—''if'' they possess a constitution that pits opposing factions against each other with a durable system of binding [[Separation of powers#Checks and balances|checks and balances]]. Essentially, particular states may use federation as a mechanism (a safeguard) against the possibilities of rebellion or war—or the rise of repressive government via a would-be dictator or a centralized [[oligarchy]].

Proponents of federal systems have historically argued that the structures of checks-and-balances and power-sharing that are inherent in a federal system reduces threats—both foreign and domestic. And federalism enables a state to be ''both large and diverse'', by mitigating the risk of a central government turning tyrannical.<ref>{{cite book |last=Deudney |first=Daniel H. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NalIdFN65e8C |title=Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village |date=2007 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-1-4008-3727-4 |language=en |access-date=2022-04-15 |archive-date=2023-07-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230731153735/https://books.google.com/books?id=NalIdFN65e8C |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Deudney |first=Daniel |date=2004 |title=Publius Before Kant: Federal-Republican Security and Democratic Peace |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1354066104045540 |journal=European Journal of International Relations |language=en |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=315–356 |doi=10.1177/1354066104045540 |s2cid=143608840 |issn=1354-0661 |access-date=2022-04-15 |archive-date=2022-04-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220415013609/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1354066104045540 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription }}</ref>

==Examples==
{{main|List of federal countries}}

Countries around the world have implemented federal systems using variations of central and regional sovereignty for their governments. For convenience of studying these governments, they may be divided according to several categories, such as: ''minimalistic'' federations, which consist of only two sub-federal units (subunits); as compared to ''multi-regional'' federations, consisting of three or more regional governments (subunits). Or, based on their body [[polity]] type: emirate, provincial, state, [[republicanism]] or [[constitutional monarchy]], democratic—or ''democratic in-name-only''. And, federal systems may be differentiated between those whose ''entire'' territory is federated, vs. ''only part'' of their territory is federated. Some systems are national while others, like the [[European Union]], are supra-national.

Two extremes of federalism are notable: 1) at one extreme, the strong federal state is almost completely unitary, with few powers reserved to local governments; 2) at the opposite extreme, the national government may be a federation in name-only, while actually operating as a [[confederation]], (see "pathway" graphic re regional integration or regional separation). Federalism may encompass as few as two or three internal divisions, as is the case in [[Administrative divisions of Belgium|Belgium]] or [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]].

In [[#Canada|Canada]], federalism typically implies opposition to [[sovereigntist|sovereignty]] movements—most commonly the question of [[Quebec separatism]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.cbc.ca/archives/lesson-plan/for-teachers-debating-federalism-and-separatism |title=CBC on Federalism and Separatism |access-date=2022-03-24 |archive-date=2022-03-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220324040215/https://www.cbc.ca/archives/lesson-plan/for-teachers-debating-federalism-and-separatism |url-status=live }}</ref> In 1999, the [[Government of Canada]] established the [[Forum of Federations]] as an international network for exchange of best practices among federal and federalizing countries. Headquartered in [[Ottawa]], the Forum of Federations partner governments include Australia, Brazil, Ethiopia, Germany, India, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan and Switzerland.

The governments of [[#Argentina|Argentina]], [[#Australia|Australia]], [[#Brazil|Brazil]], [[#India|India]], and [[#Mexico|Mexico]], among others, are organized along federalist principles.

==Europe vs. the United States==
{{main|Federal Europe|Federalism in the United States}}
In [[#Federalism in Europe|Europe]], "federalist" is sometimes used to describe those who favor a common federal government, with distributed power at regional, national and supranational levels. The [[Union of European Federalists]] advocates for this development within the [[European Union]], ultimately leading to the [[European Federation|United States of Europe]].<ref>{{cite book | last=Pistone | first=Sergio | url=https://www.federalists.eu/fileadmin/files_uef/Pictures/Website_Animation/About_UEF/70th_Anniversary/UEF_Booklet_70_Years_of_Campaigns_for_a_United_and_Federal_Europe.pdf | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160928224450/http://www.federalists.eu/fileadmin/files_uef/Pictures/Website_Animation/About_UEF/70th_Anniversary/UEF_Booklet_70_Years_of_Campaigns_for_a_United_and_Federal_Europe.pdf | archive-date=2016-09-28 | url-status=live | title=70 years on campaigns for a united and federal Europe | date=2016-06-08 | publication-place=Brussels | publisher=[[Union of European Federalists]]}}</ref> Although there are medieval and early modern examples of European states which used confederal and federal systems, contemporary [[European Federalism|European federalism]] originated in post-war Europe; one of the more important initiatives was [[Winston Churchill]]'s speech in [[Zürich]] in 1946.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html|title=The Churchill Society London. Churchill's Speeches.|website=www.churchill-society-london.org.uk|access-date=2011-09-06|archive-date=2012-04-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120422233906/http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html|url-status=dead}}</ref>

In the [[#United States|United States]], federalism originally referred to belief in a stronger central government. When the U.S. Constitution was being drafted, the [[Federalist Party]] supported a stronger central government, while "[[Anti-Federalism|Anti-Federalists]]" wanted a weaker central government. This is very different from the modern usage of "federalism" in Europe and the United States. The distinction stems from the fact that "federalism" is situated in the middle of the political spectrum between a [[confederation|confederacy]] and a [[unitary state]]. The U.S. Constitution was written as a replacement for the [[Articles of Confederation]], under which the United States was a loose confederation with a weak central government.

In contrast, Europe has a greater history of unitary states than North America, thus European "federalism" argues for a weaker central government, relative to a unitary state. The modern American usage of the word is much closer to the European sense. As the power of the [[Federal government of the United States|U.S. federal government]] has increased, some people{{who|date=April 2019}} have perceived a much more unitary state than they believe the [[Founding Fathers of the United States|Founding Fathers]] intended. Most people politically advocating "federalism" in the United States argue in favor of limiting the powers of the federal government, especially the [[Courts of the United States|judiciary]] (see [[Federalist Society]], [[New Federalism]]).

The contemporary concept of federalism came about with the creation of an entirely new system of government that provided for democratic representation at two governing levels simultaneously, which was implemented in the [[Constitution of the United States|US Constitution]].<ref>{{cite journal | last=Law | first=John | date=2012 | title=Sense on Federalism | journal=Political Quarterly | volume=83 | issue=3 | issn=0032-3179 | doi=10.1111/j.1467-923X.2012.02336.x | pages=541–550, at pp. 543–544}}</ref>{{sfn|Wheare|1946|p=11}} In the United States implementation of federalism, a bicameral general government, consisting of a chamber of popular representation proportional to population ([[United States House of Representatives|the House of Representatives]]), and a chamber of equal State-based representation consisting of two delegates per State ([[United States Senate|the Senate]]), was overlaid upon the pre-existing regional governments of the thirteen independent States. With each level of government allocated a defined sphere of powers, under a written constitution and the rule of law (that is, subject to the independent third-party arbitration of a supreme court in competence disputes), the two levels were thus brought into a coordinate relationship {{explain|date=October 2021}} for the first time.

In 1946, [[Kenneth Wheare]] observed that the two levels of government in the US were "co-equally supreme".{{sfn|Wheare|1946|pp=10–15}}{{full|the precise page number must appear inmediately after queoted material. See [[WP:CITE]]|date=October 2021}} In this, he echoed the perspective of American founding father James Madison who saw the several States as forming "distinct and independent portions of the supremacy"<ref>Madison, James, Hamilton, Alexander and Jay, John (1987) ''The Federalist Papers'', Penguin, Harmondsworth, p. 258.</ref> in relation to the general government.

== In anarchism ==
{{See also|Libertarian socialist decentralization}}
In [[anarchism]], federalism is a [[horizontalidad|horizontalist]] and [[decentralization|decentralized]] organizational doctrine which holds that society should be built from the bottom-up, from the periphery to the centre. Higher-order units are merely the [[direct democracy|direct expression]] of lower-order units delegating, combining and coordinating. Though there is no central government or administration, higher-order [[committees]] and [[councils]], composed of delegates from federal constituencies, may convene under a [[popular sovereignty|popular, revocable mandate]].<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=al-Rashid |first=Daniel |date=1 July 2020 |title=What do anarchists mean by 'federalism'? |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/daniel-al-rashid-what-do-anarchists-mean-by-federalism |access-date= |website=The Anarchist Library |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Kinna |first1=Ruth |last2=Prichard |first2=Alex |last3=Swann |first3=Thomas |date=13 June 2019 |title=Occupy and the constitution of anarchy |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/global-constitutionalism/article/occupy-and-the-constitution-of-anarchy/BBE87B0A645A385397927D0BA8C6FAC4 |journal=Global Constitutionalism|volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=357–390 |doi=10.1017/S204538171900008X |hdl=10871/35870 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

Embracing the principle of [[free association of producers|free]] and [[voluntary association|voluntary]] association as the basis of a federal society, constituent entities of an anarchist federation are ideally autonomous and self-determining, collaborating equally, freely and mutually within the federation through the values of [[solidarity]] and [[autonomy]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Whitman |first=W. J. |date=21 February 2023 |title=Anarcho-Distributism and Anarchist Federalism |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/w-j-whitman-anarcho-distributism-and-anarchist-federalism |website=The Anarchist Library |language=en}}</ref>

Unlike a [[republic|republican]] federation, federalism, in anarchy, is not simply a form of [[political division]] or [[devolution]], but rather, federative principles apply to all aspects of society, including [[social relations]] and the [[economy]]. Consequently, anarchist federalism, promoting widespread, [[common ownership]] over the [[means of production]], detests the [[wealth inequality|centralized and unequal]] nature of [[capitalism]], and the hierarchy of its [[corporation|companies and corporations]]: an anarchist federalist society would envisage widespread, federalized [[wealth distribution]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ward |first=Colin |date=October 2004 |title=The federalist agenda |url=https://academic.oup.com/book/427/chapter-abstract/135222469 |website=Oxford Academic |language=en}}</ref>

Comparing republican and anarchist federalism, [[James Guillaume]] states that [[Switzerland]]'s federative [[Cantons of Switzerland|cantonal system]], despite its [[direct democracy]], differs significantly from anarchist federalism: while Swiss federalism retains a state and provides only limited regional sovereignty, anarchist federalism as envisioned by [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] is stateless, providing every autonomy with absolute sovereignty and distinct individuality. The [[Swiss constitution]], in its support of [[wikt:indivisibility|indivisibility]] and [[nationhood]] and its view that its cantons are mere territorial divisions rather than sovereign constituencies, is incompatible with anarchist federalism and its principles of [[free association of producers|free association]], [[decentralization]] and [[autonomy]].<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Proudhon |first=Pierre-Joseph |date=1863 |title=The Federative Principle |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-the-principle-of-federation |website=The Anarchist Library |language=en}}</ref>

Anarchist federalism is a rejection of the [[statism]] and [[nationalism]] present in modern federations, and instead provides an alternative system of federative organization founded on stateless [[individuality]] and [[autonomy]]. For anarchists, [[republic|republican]] federalism is as oppressive as a [[centralization|centralized, unitary state]], for all it is perceived to accomplish is delegate and transfer the perceived oppression of a [[State (polity)|state]] to [[Localism (politics)|local levels and jurisdictions]].<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=José |first1=Gutiérrez |last2=Kinna |first2=Ruth |date=28 October 2022 |title=Anarchism and the national question |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/nana.12891 |journal=Nations and Nationalism |volume=29 |issue=1 |pages=121–130 |doi=10.1111/nana.12891 |language=en}}</ref>

==Constitutional structure==
===Division of powers===
{{distinguish|separation of powers}}
In a federation, the division of power between federal and regional governments is usually outlined in the [[constitution]]. Almost every country allows some degree of regional self-government, but in federations the right to self-government of the component states is constitutionally entrenched. Component states often also possess their own constitutions which they may amend as they see fit, although in the event of conflict the federal constitution usually takes precedence.

In almost all federations the central government enjoys the powers of foreign policy and national defense as [[exclusive federal powers]]. Were this not the case a federation would not be a single sovereign state, per the UN definition. Notably, the [[states of Germany]] retain the right to act on their own behalf at an international level, a condition originally granted in exchange for the [[Kingdom of Bavaria]]'s agreement to join the [[German Empire]] in 1871. The constitutions of [[Grundgesetz|Germany]] and the [[United States Constitution|United States]] provide that all powers not specifically granted to the federal government are retained by the states. The Constitution of some countries, like [[Constitution of Canada|Canada]] and [[Constitution of India|India]], state that powers not explicitly granted to the provincial/state governments are retained by the federal government. Much like the US system, the Australian Constitution allocates to the Federal government (the Commonwealth of Australia) the power to make laws about certain specified matters which were considered too difficult for the States to manage, so that the States retain all other areas of responsibility. Under the division of powers of the European Union in the [[Treaty of Lisbon|Lisbon Treaty]], powers which are not either exclusively of [[Template:European Union competences|Union competence]] or shared between the Union and the Member States as [[concurrent powers]] are retained by the constituent States.

[[File:La esp Rep. Federal, Rep. Unitaria (2).JPG|thumb|Satiric depiction of late 19th-century political tensions in Spain]]
Where every component state of a federation possesses the same powers, we are said to find 'symmetric federalism'. [[Asymmetric federalism]] exists where states are granted different powers, or some possess greater autonomy than others do. This is often done in recognition of the existence of a distinct culture in a particular region or regions. In Spain, the [[History of the Basque people#Late Modern history|Basques]] and [[Catalan people|Catalans]], as well as the [[Galicians]], spearheaded a historic movement to have their national specificity recognized, crystallizing in the "historical communities" such as [[Navarre]], [[Galicia (Spain)|Galicia]], [[Catalonia]], and the [[Basque Country (autonomous community)|Basque Country]]. They have more powers than the later expanded arrangement for other Spanish regions, or [[Autonomous communities of Spain|the Spain of the autonomous communities]] (called also the "coffee for everyone" arrangement), partly to deal with their separate identity and to appease peripheral nationalist leanings, partly out of respect to [[Fuero#Basque and Pyrenean fueros|specific rights they had held]] earlier in history. However, strictly speaking Spain is not a federation, but a system of asymmetric devolved government within a unitary state.

It is common that during the historical evolution of a federation there is a gradual movement of power from the component states to the centre, as the federal government acquires additional powers, sometimes to deal with unforeseen circumstances. The acquisition of new powers by a federal government may occur through formal constitutional amendment or simply through a broadening of the interpretation of a government's existing constitutional powers given by the courts.

Usually, a federation is formed at two levels: the central government and the regions (states, provinces, territories), and little to nothing is said about second or third level administrative political entities. Brazil is an exception, because the 1988 Constitution included the municipalities as autonomous political entities making the federation tripartite, encompassing the Union, the States, and the municipalities. Each state is divided into municipalities (''municípios'') with their own legislative council (''câmara de vereadores'') and a mayor (''prefeito''), which are partly autonomous from both Federal and State Government. Each municipality has a "little constitution", called "organic law" (''lei orgânica''). Mexico is an intermediate case, in that municipalities are granted full-autonomy by the federal constitution and their existence as autonomous entities (''municipio libre'', "free municipality") is established by the federal government and cannot be revoked by the states' constitutions. Moreover, the federal constitution determines which powers and competencies belong exclusively to the municipalities and not to the [[political divisions of Mexico|constituent states]]. However, municipalities do not have an elected legislative assembly.

Federations often employ the [[paradox]] of being a union of states, while still being states (or having aspects of [[Sovereign state|statehood]]) in themselves. For example, James Madison (author of the [[United States Constitution]]) wrote in [[Federalist No. 39|Federalist Paper No. 39]] that the US Constitution "is in strictness neither a national nor a federal constitution; but a composition of both. In its foundation, it is federal, not national; in the sources from which the ordinary powers of the Government are drawn, it is partly federal, and partly national..." This stems from the fact that states in the US maintain all [[sovereignty]] that they do not yield to the federation by their own consent. This was reaffirmed by the [[Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution]], which reserves all powers and rights that are not delegated to the Federal Government as left to the States and to the people.

===Bicameralism===
The structures of most federal governments incorporate mechanisms to protect the rights of component states. One method, known as '[[intrastate federalism]]', is to directly represent the governments of component states in federal political institutions. Where a federation has a [[bicameral]] legislature the [[upper house]] is often used to represent the component states while the [[lower house]] represents the people of the nation as a whole. A federal upper house may be based on a special scheme of [[apportionment (politics)|apportionment]], as is the case in the [[senate]]s of the United States and Australia, where each state is represented by an equal number of senators irrespective of the size of its population.

Alternatively, or in addition to this practice, the members of an upper house may be indirectly elected by the government or legislature of the component states, as occurred in the United States [[Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|prior to 1913]], or be actual members or delegates of the state governments, as, for example, is the case in the [[Bundesrat (Germany)|German Bundesrat]] and in the [[Council of the European Union]]. The lower house of a federal legislature is usually directly elected, with apportionment in proportion to population, although states may sometimes still be guaranteed a certain minimum number of seats.

===Intergovernmental relations===
In Canada, the provincial governments represent regional interests and negotiate directly with the central government. A [[First Ministers conference]] of the prime minister and the provincial premiers is the ''[[de facto]]'' highest political forum in the land, although it is not mentioned in the constitution.

===Constitutional change===
Federations often have special procedures for amendment of the federal constitution. As well as reflecting the federal structure of the state this may guarantee that the self-governing status of the component states cannot be abolished without their consent. An amendment to the constitution of the United States must be ratified by three-quarters of either the state legislatures, or of constitutional conventions specially elected in each of the states, before it can come into effect. In referendums to amend the constitutions of Australia and Switzerland it is required that a proposal be endorsed not just by an overall majority of the electorate in the nation as a whole, but also by separate majorities in each of a majority of the states or cantons. In Australia, this latter requirement is known as a ''double majority''.

Some federal constitutions also provide that certain constitutional amendments cannot occur without the unanimous consent of all states or of a particular state. The US constitution provides that no state may be deprived of equal representation in the senate without its consent. In Australia, if a proposed amendment will specifically impact one or more states, then it must be endorsed in the referendum held in each of those states. Any amendment to the Canadian constitution that would modify the role of the [[Monarchy in Canada|monarchy]] would require unanimous consent of the provinces. The [[Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany|German Basic Law]] provides that no amendment is admissible at all that would abolish the federal system.

===Other technical terms===
* [[Fiscal federalism]] – the relative financial positions and the financial relations between the levels of government in a federal system.
* Formal federalism (or '[[constitutional federalism]]') – the delineation of powers is specified in a written constitution, which may or may not correspond to the actual operation of the system in practice.
* [[Executive federalism]] refers in the English-speaking tradition to the intergovernmental relationships between the executive branches of the levels of government in a federal system and in the continental European tradition to the way constituent units 'execute' or administer laws made centrally.
* [[Gleichschaltung]] – the conversion from a federal governance to either a completely unitary or more unitary one, the term was borrowed from the German for conversion from [[Alternating current|alternating]] to [[direct current]].<ref>{{cite book | last=Koonz | first=Claudia | title=The Nazi Conscience | location=Cambridge, MA | publisher=Belknap Press of Harvard University Press | year=2003 | isbn=978-0-674-01172-4|page=72 | url-access=registration | url=https://archive.org/details/naziconscience00koon }}</ref> During the Nazi era the [[States of the Weimar Republic|traditional German states]] were mostly left intact in the formal sense, but their constitutional rights and sovereignty were eroded and ultimately ended and replaced with the [[Gau (territory)#Nazi period|Gau system]]. ''Gleichschaltung'' also has a broader sense referring to political consolidation in general.
* defederalize – to remove from federal government, such as taking a responsibility from a national level government and giving it to states or provinces.

==In relation to conflict==
It has been argued that federalism and other forms of territorial autonomy are a useful way to structure political systems in order to prevent violence among different groups within countries because it allows certain groups to legislate at the subnational level.<ref>{{cite book|first=Arend |last=Lijphart |date=1977 |title=Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration |location=New Haven, CT |publisher=[[Yale University Press]]}}</ref> Some scholars have suggested, however, that federalism can divide countries and result in state collapse because it creates proto-states.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Hale |first=Henry E. |date=2004 |title=Divided We Stand: Institutional Sources of Ethnofederal State Survival and Collapse |journal=World Politics |language=en |volume=56 |issue=2 |pages=165–193 |doi=10.1353/wp.2004.0011 |s2cid=155052031 |issn=1086-3338|doi-access=free }}</ref> Still others have shown that federalism is only divisive when it lacks mechanisms that encourage political parties to compete across regional boundaries.<ref>{{cite book | last=Brancati | first=Dawn | date=2009 | title=Peace by design: Managing intrastate conflict through decentralization | publisher=Oxford University Press | isbn=978-0-19-954900-9 | oclc=245559225 | doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199549009.001.0001 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NdsVDAAAQBAJ}} [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288765127_Peace_by_Design_Managing_Intrastate_Conflict_through_Decentralization Chapter summaries]</ref>

Federalism is sometimes viewed in the context of international negotiation as "the best system for integrating diverse nations, ethnic groups, or combatant parties, all of whom may have cause to fear control by an overly powerful center".<ref name="Meyer-Resende">{{cite magazine | last=Meyer-Resende | first=Michael | date=18 March 2016 | title=Why talk of federalism won't help peace in Syria | magazine=[[Foreign Policy]] | url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/18/why-talk-of-federalism-wont-help-peace-in-syria-assad/ | access-date=19 June 2024 | url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170315000604/https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/18/why-talk-of-federalism-wont-help-peace-in-syria-assad/ | archive-date=2017-03-15}}</ref> However, those skeptical of federal prescriptions sometimes believe that increased [[regional autonomy]] can lead to secession or dissolution of the nation.<ref name="Meyer-Resende" /> In [[Syria]], for example, federalization proposals have failed in part because "Syrians fear that these borders could turn out to be the same as the ones that the fighting parties have currently carved out."<ref name="Meyer-Resende" />

==See also==
{{Columnslist|colwidth=30em|
* {{Annotated link |Bibliography of the United States Constitution}}
*{{Annotated link |Commonwealth}}
*{{Annotated link |Consociationalism}}
*{{Annotated link |Cooperative federalism}}
*{{Annotated link |Democratic World Federalists}}
*{{Annotated link |Feudalism}}
*{{Annotated link |Neo-feudalism}}
*{{Annotated link |Federal republicanism}}
*{{Annotated link |Federal Union}}
*{{Annotated link |Forum of Federations}}
*{{Annotated link |Layer cake federalism}}
*{{Annotated link |Non-governmental federation}}
*{{Annotated link |Pillarisation}}
*{{Annotated link |States' rights}}
*{{Annotated link |Union of Utrecht}}
*{{Annotated link |World Federalist Movement}}
}}
{{Portal bar|Politics|Society|Philosophy}}

==Notes and references==
{{reflist}}

==Sources==
{{refbegin|30em}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Bednar |first1=Jenna |doi=10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102510-105522 |title=The Political Science of Federalism |year=2011 |journal=[[Annual Review of Law and Social Science]] |volume=7 |pages=269–288}}
* {{cite book |last=Broschek |first=Jorg |chapter=Federalism in Europe, America and Africa: A Comparative Analysis |title=Federalism and Decentralization: Perceptions for Political and Institutional Reforms |year=2016 |location=Singapore |publisher=Konrad Adenauer Stiftung |pages=23–50 |url=https://broschek.ca/uploads/Federalism%20in%20Europe,%20America%20and%20Africa%20A%20Comparative%20Analysis.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201020012902/https://broschek.ca/uploads/Federalism%20in%20Europe,%20America%20and%20Africa%20A%20Comparative%20Analysis.pdf |archive-date=2020-10-20 |url-status=live }}
* {{cite book |last=Forsyth |first=Murray |date=1981 |title=Unions of States: The Theory and Practice of Confederation |publisher=[[Leicester University Press]] |oclc=1170233780}}
* {{cite book |last=Gerven |first=Walter van |title=The European Union: A Polity of States and Peoples |year=2005 |location=Stanford |publisher=[[Stanford University Press]] |isbn=9780804750646 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nZ0lIXo53hMC |access-date=2020-10-18 |archive-date=2023-07-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230731153755/https://books.google.com/books?id=nZ0lIXo53hMC |url-status=live }}
* {{cite book |last=Wheare |first=Kenneth |author-link=Kenneth Wheare |date=1946 |title=Federal Government |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |location=London}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
{{Wiktionary}}
{{Commons category|Federalism}}

{{autonomous types of first-tier administration}}
{{authority control}}

[[Category:Federalism| ]]
[[Category:Political systems]]
[[Category:Political theories]]

[[ca:Federació]]