Europeanization of turkish subnational administrations

5.4. CONCLUSION

The chapter has outlined the governance modality in Turkey in order to explore potential integral triggers or impediments for the mobilisation of SNAs in Brussels. Regarding the main (and sub-) questions of the thesis, it has presented a number of domestic (national and subnational) intermediating factors that may affect the mobilisation of Turkish SNAs in Brussels. Whereas most of the EU countries have engaged in a long process of decentralization (Goldsmith & Page, 2010), the Turkish administrative system has been increasingly centralized with power almost completely focused on Ankara. This process was a particular characteristic of the late Ottoman and the Early Republican Era practices. There were periods of significant reforms in the context of public and local administrations but the overall framework fundamentally remained in place.

The lack of a regional government tradition, an excessive central tutelage on local administrations, the indivisibility principle of administrations and the fear of irredentism may be considered as the main characteristics of traditional Turkish governance prior to the EU accession process during the 2000s. Such characteristics display close parallels with Napoleonic state tradition. They also contain various cultural elements of southern European societies in terms of clientelism, patronage and weak civil society, forming societal and institutional memory among SNAs. In that respect, most of the structural limits for SNAs in general and their relations through horizontal and vertical administrative levels in particular are to be found in the history of the local and regional problems in Turkey.

Prior to the Helsinki Summit of 1999, there seemed to be several reform efforts in the context of territorial relations in Turkey. Yet they were usually erratic and ephemeral due to the hesitancy of the national authorities to lose their tutelage at subnational level. Due to the centralization of power and influence at the national level, relations between SNAs and central government have been regulated through the mode of gatekeeping, which exercises financial, administrative, and technical controls over their affairs. In this respect, many SNAs have found it difficult to become path breakers by engaging such mobilisation across the European arena. They have opted for vertical relations based on individual links with the political and national elites, instead of forming horizontal relations through different stakeholders (public-private-third sectors) that may in turn foster the collective action of given territories. In this sense, the traditional Turkish administrative system represents an excellent case of unitary states that have been highly centralized, allowing little administrative decentralization. This seems to be an important obstacle for any genuine efforts towards subnational mobilisation.

The general acceptance of the chapter is that the ultimate subnational response is also mediated by certain subnational factors, such as regional distinctiveness, the quality of intergovernmental relations, and pre-existing regional networks. It was argued that while the regional distinctiveness may play a negative role, the quality of intergovernmental relations and the pre-existing regional networks may stimulate the behaviour of SNAs. These factors will also be taken up in chapter nine in order to investigate their effects on three case cities, Samsun, Diyarbakir and Izmir.

Next to the domestic context, external developments have subsequently enforced necessary changes for the effective local administrations in Turkey. These changes have given more responsibility and space for SNAs to integrate with other local stakeholders in their territory and cooperate with their international counterparts especially in the EU area. For this reason, the next chapter demonstrates the extent to which external developments, particularly the EU, have impacted on centralist Turkish governance, and discusses whether or not any of the changes provide opportunity structures for SNAs to engage with EU politics. The important question to bear in mind for the chapters ahead is whether the pull effect of EU opportunity structures contributes to the mobilisation of SNAs, or it is a result of push factors deriving from the organizational capacity as well as subnational context of a given SNA.

CHAPTER 6 THE IMPACT OF EUROPEANIZATION ON TERRITORIAL RELATIONS IN TURKEY IN THE POST-HELSINKI ERA

6.1. INTRODUCTION

This chapter focuses on the interplay between the impact of Europeanization and changing intergovernmental relations in Turkey to find out whether there is an emerging pattern of multi-level modality. The chapter specifically focuses on the assessment of the vertical change within the national jurisdiction to explore the extent to which Europeanization has changed the dynamics of territorial relations in Turkey by giving specific reference to the creation of new territorial arrangements at regional level (i.e. RDAs). It also aims to observe whether such changes have provided new opportunities for SNAs to mobilize across the EU arena. This chapter is important for two major reasons. First, it outlines the manner in which top-down Europeanization helped to shape the regional process, change territorial relations between national and subnational level, and create new opportunity structures for SNAs. This is also considered the formal effect (first generation) of Europeanization on Turkish governance. Secondly, it discusses whether the pull effect of the EU accession process has a role in the mobilisation of SNAs in Brussels.

The chapter unfolds in four broad parts. The first part outlines the financial incentives for Turkey in two budget periods (2000-2006 and 2007-2013). The second part examines the impact of the EU accession process on traditional Turkish governance, which has created new opportunities for SNAs to engage with EU politics. The third part analyses the limitations for multi-level modality in Turkey. These are also considered as the main obstacles for subnational mobilisation in Brussels. The final part provides a conclusion about whether there is any genuine shift towards a multi-level modality.