Putnam (1993) lays the groundwork for this research by demonstrating the stark differences among the towns across Italy. For example, Seveso, a town in the northern region of Italy, is described as a “modest, modern town in the mixed industrial-and-farming belt” (1993, 4), but became world-famous due to an ecological disaster when a chemical plant exploded and nearly crippled the town’s economy. In another instance, Pietrapertosa, a town in the southern region of Italy, seemed to mimic the public governance of centuries in the past according to Putnam (1993, 4). Many citizens in this town still lived in stone hovels, local farmers still threshed grain by hand, and transportation – at least for the less fortunate residents – was provided by
…show more content…
As regional policymakers gained legislative authority, the process of reaching accommodation on a wide array of issues no longer created partisan hostility (1993, 32). Putnam writes, “regional councilors now spoke more of efficient service delivery, and less of capitalism or socialism” (1993, 34). The new regional institutions fostered tolerant, collaborative pragmatism. Putnam fails to adequately note, however, that institutional performance across regions may have been impacted by the institutional priorities of regional councilors. Nevertheless, he acknowledges the fact that the northern regional councilors harbored horizontal relations with constituents while the southern regional councilors were bound by vertical relations of authority and dependency with patron-clientelism (1993, 88). If the manner by which regional councilors govern are significantly different, this may suggest that their institutional priorities are vastly different as well. Although the regions were created with virtually identical institutional structures and mandates, this research does not address how regional councilors’ institutional priorities and governance tactics may ultimately impact institutional performance aside from social …show more content…
On the other hand, Northern Italy, which has a much different political culture, with high levels of interpersonal trust, and thus has strong institutions and healthy economy. Simply put, attributes of political culture that explain civic society, trust toward institutions, and its effect on both governance and citizen 's approach toward government, are ignored. More importantly, and related to this, is the fact that the historical context is ignored: of course the formation of new institutions with its existing "civic-ness," or "civic communities" is different in the north than the south. The south does not have the same political traditions, and as such, when the institutions were implemented in the 70 's, they were developed on completely different socio-historic and socio-political
As regional policymakers gained legislative authority, the process of reaching accommodation on a wide array of issues no longer created partisan hostility (1993, 32). Putnam writes, “regional councilors now spoke more of efficient service delivery, and less of capitalism or socialism” (1993, 34). The new regional institutions fostered tolerant, collaborative pragmatism. Putnam fails to adequately note, however, that institutional performance across regions may have been impacted by the institutional priorities of regional councilors. Nevertheless, he acknowledges the fact that the northern regional councilors harbored horizontal relations with constituents while the southern regional councilors were bound by vertical relations of authority and dependency with patron-clientelism (1993, 88). If the manner by which regional councilors govern are significantly different, this may suggest that their institutional priorities are vastly different as well. Although the regions were created with virtually identical institutional structures and mandates, this research does not address how regional councilors’ institutional priorities and governance tactics may ultimately impact institutional performance aside from social …show more content…
On the other hand, Northern Italy, which has a much different political culture, with high levels of interpersonal trust, and thus has strong institutions and healthy economy. Simply put, attributes of political culture that explain civic society, trust toward institutions, and its effect on both governance and citizen 's approach toward government, are ignored. More importantly, and related to this, is the fact that the historical context is ignored: of course the formation of new institutions with its existing "civic-ness," or "civic communities" is different in the north than the south. The south does not have the same political traditions, and as such, when the institutions were implemented in the 70 's, they were developed on completely different socio-historic and socio-political