This article explores the emergence of localism as a key concept in local governance. It distinguishes between devolution, subsidiarity and localism, and examines how current policy development in New Zealand still reflects a very top-down understanding of governance. It then argues that local government has all the powers required to put in place a radical practice of localism and explains how.

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.

By exploring the legislative and structural elements that shape municipal (local) level government in Canada and local government in Ireland and the UK, this paper will seek to provide an analysis of the most accessible layer of government in each country. It starts with a brief introduction and overview of the Canadian political system. It will then assess the relationship that the municipal government has with its provincial levels counterparts as well as comparing it with the local-central level relationship that exists in Ireland and the more comparable system of multi-layered interaction in the UK. Finally, the paper concludes with a comment section outlining what lessons can be learned and applied as a result of this comparative analysis, as well as identifying the challenges that local government faces more broadly in an ever globalizing political climate.

It is often claimed that decentralisation is effective for the reduction of poverty due to inherent opportunities for higher popular participation and increased efficiency in public service delivery. This paper is a qualitative assessment of the potential of the Ugandan decentralisation reform for poverty alleviation. The Ugandan government initiated an ambitious decentralisation reform in 1992, which represents an example of full-fledged devolution with the transfer of far-reaching responsibilities to local governments. However, several shortcomings, such as low levels of accountability, insufficient human and financial resources, corruption, patronage, and central resistance to decentralisation, constrain the proper implementation of the reform, putting improvements in participation and efficiency at risk and ultimately jeopardising the intended impact on poverty.