Localism is widely supported as an antidote to what are seen as the adverse impacts of globalisation and one-size-fits-all, top-down central government. But interpretations of localism and views on how it should be practised vary greatly. This presents particular challenges for local government, which typically sees itself as the rightful beneficiary of a localism agenda focused on devolution and decentralisation, but must then confront difficult questions about its own institutional frameworks, its revenue base, and sharing power with local communities. While local government in New Zealand is exploring these issues through a national Localism project, its counterparts in Australia seem ill-prepared to follow suit.

The received view of state development in New Zealand is that the abolition of the ‘provincial system’ in 1876 set in motion the inexorable rise of centralised authority. The counter thesis presented in this article argues that until about 1940 central  politicians, irrespective of party, were consistently engaged in empowering rather than diminishing local government. There was ultimate respect for the idea of local self-government; therefore, in colonial society, of local control of local development. This independence weakened only as technological change rendered ‘small’ local government increasingly inefficient and unable to meet new challenges and opportunities, particularly with respect to highways, housing and welfare.

From Localism Towards Localism: a personal journey of policy discovery. Localism has become a buzzword in New Zealand politics. Though well-established overseas, it is, however, still a relatively new concept here. In this essay, Oliver Hartwich explains how his experience of German localism shaped his policy work in Britain, Australia and now New Zealand.

Localism is about citizens, not town halls. It engages, encourages and empowers citizens and their formal, semi-formal and informal groupings, street level to citywide, including not-for-profits. To be effective and constructive, citizen-centric localism needs to be bottom-up, not just top-down, driven by iterative interaction to fashion thought-through decisions. Digital technology enables this in ways not possible a decade ago. Local councils are the right level of government to develop and refine that interaction and thereby revitalise local – and in time national – democracy.

This issue of the GSoD In Focus explores the contribution that the Global State of Democracy (GSoD) Indices can make to the review of progress on the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The GSoD Indices can be used to complement the official indicators of the SDGs, to acquire in-depth knowledge on trends in achieving the specific targets of individual SDGs. In this regard, the GSoD Indices can be used to provide data on the SDGs for poverty (SDG 1), hunger (2), health and wellbeing (3), education (4), gender equality (5), inequalities (10), sustainable cities and communities (11), peace, justice and institutions (16), and partnerships for the goals (17), as well as across the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.