Federalism

Distribution of executive powers
It is usual for the distribution of executive powers to mirror the distribution of 
legislative powers, such that the federal executive is responsible for administering 
programmes and enforcing laws that are enacted by the federal legislature, while 
subnational executives are responsible for administering and enforcing laws 
enacted by subnational legislatures.
In some cases (e.g. Germany), however, federal executive powers are narrower 
than federal legislative powers, such that state/provincial executives are 
responsible for implementing and enforcing federal laws in some policy areas. If 
well handled, this arrangement can provide unity in legislative frameworks while 
allowing discretion to the states over priorities in implementing laws.

---

16 International IDEA
Federalism
Which powers should be exercised at which level?
In almost all cases, the federal authorities have sole responsibility for matters such 
as defence, foreign policy, citizenship and immigration, and macro-economics 
(such as currency and foreign trade). Beyond this, the extent to which powers are 
distributed between different levels of government varies considerably (see Table 
4.1). A general trend is for more recent federal constitutions to grant more powers 
to the federal level, consistent with an expanding role for government in modern 
societies (Irving 2008: 68). In some ‘holding together’ situations, however, a 
reverse trend is evident, as divergent regions have sought to expand their powers 
at the expense of federal or national authorities (e.g. Belgium, Spain). In practice, 
much depends on the degree and intensity of demand for decentralized powers 
and on the negotiating strengths of each side.
Aside from a struggle for power and resources, some criteria must be employed 
to assess whether the constitutional distribution of powers between different levels 
of government is acceptable and practicable. Subsidiarity is an orientating 
principle that has been widely—although not universally—accepted as a guide to 
finding a good balance. Subsidiarity requires that ‘a community of a higher order 
should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, 
depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need 
and help to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always 
with a view to the common good’.
In other words, subsidiarity makes a presumption that powers should rest with 
the state, provincial or regional bodies, which should be free to act autonomously. 
However, simply acquiescing to every demand for autonomy would not 
necessarily produce good government or sustainable outcomes. To avoid 
economic instability, for example, the federal government might need to retain 
certain expenditure responsibilities that particularly affect aggregate demand or 
that fluctuate with the economic cycle, such as unemployment benefits. There are 
also situations where the use of a power by one state, region or province could 
seriously disadvantage or prejudice another (e.g. in the fields of environmental 
protection or interstate water management), as well as situations where it makes 
sense for cooperation to extend over internal boundaries in order to achieve 
common goals (in the co-financing and maintenance of trunk roads and other 
infrastructure projects). Likewise, a public expectation of minimum standards 
throughout the country covering public services, such as health and education, 
might lead to a reasonable call for national regulation of those services. In these 
and similar cases, the principle of subsidiarity may justify allocating powers to the 
federal level.

---

International IDEA 17
4. Distribution of powers
Table 4.1. Distribution of powers in selected federal (or quasi-federal) countries