Many district reforms in Germany have repeatedly caused displeasure and confusion among citizens in recent years. The central problem is that in most of these reforms, the districts – i.e. the regional administrative units – are merged without the population being involved or questioned in any way beforehand. This approachleads to a number of adverse consequences that directly affect people’s everyday lives. There are often long distances to the offices and administrative bodies, which makes access to important services more difficult. At the same time, the distance between the citizens and the authorities is growing, which causes an increasing alienation. The hoped-for positive effects, such as cost savings ormore efficient administration, rarely occur to a significant extent. Despite the many negative side effects, however, there are alternative approaches and models that counteract such a development and enable closer administration to the people.
Causes and consequences of the district mergers
A concrete example of a controversial reform is the so-called district reform in Bavaria, in which in 2008 the existing structure of 22 districts was reduced to only ten large districts. This project was implemented by law and met with considerable criticism from the start. Critics criticized the fact that the citizens hardly in the decision-making processwere included. Many felt left out and were skeptical about the benefits of these mergers. The result was that the acceptance of the reform remained extremely low and the practical implementation was associated with considerable problems. In the years after the reform, it became increasingly apparent that the hoped-for savings and efficiency gains were only very limitedwere realized. The administration in the new large circles is often just as complex and confusing as before. In addition, a study that has now been published by the Dresden Ifo Institute and the Center for European Economic Research in Mannheim showed that hardly a common identity has emerged in the new large circles. Instead, the interest of citizens in their policyeven further decreased. The expectations of modernization of the administration were far missed. The scientists come to the bitter conclusion that the original goals of the reforms in Saxony and other federal states were hardly achieved. Instead of bringing cost savings and more efficient management, these measures often lead to a greater alienation ofpopulation led.
The failed attempt: Woidke 2014 and its consequences
A particularly exemplary example of a failed district reform is the initiative, which was initiated in 2014 by the then Prime Minister Woidke. The aim was to modernize and make the administration in the federal state more efficient with a number of changes. But implementation proved to be extremely difficult. Since then, the state government has repeatedly dealt with the reformtormented around. The population reacted increasingly skeptical and negatively to the proposals. Woidke recently announced that there would be no vote on the reform in the state parliament. The draft laws are being withdrawn completely, the billions of billions planned for infrastructure, digitization and modernization remain unused. The project will be replaceddeleted and the plans are over. This solidarity shows how difficult it is to enforce administrative reforms when the population no longer has any confidence in the plans and policymakers lose support.
The criticism of the previous major projects and their effects
In 2008, a comprehensive district reform was implemented in the Free State of Bavaria, which is still highly controversial today. The merging of the 22 districts to only ten large districts should above all save costs and simplify the administration. But the reality is different. The reform led to greater bureaucratization, longer routes to offices and increasingalienation of the citizens. The trust in the administration was fading and the hoped-for savings were largely absent. A current study, which was presented by the scientists Felix Rösel from the Dresden IFO Institute and Sebastian Blesse from the Center for European Economic Research in Mannheim, reveals the alarming results. They show that even after more than onedecade, a common identification in the new great circles has hardly emerged. Instead, the interest of the citizens in their administration has continued to fall. The hoped-for effects, such as cost savings or more efficient structures, have so far hardly been visible. The scientists consider the reforms to be failed overall and speak of a “disaster” that the original goalsclearly missed.
Successful alternatives: citizen participation and voluntary structures
In view of these problems, the question arises as to whether there are better alternatives to make the administration closer to the citizens and more efficient. One such example is the so-called Lusatian Round, an innovative model that is unique in Germany. The Lausitz Round is based on a voluntary association of democratically elected representatives from various local authorities,From small communities to larger counties. It is a loose, unbureaucratic alliance that works without a complicated legal framework. This model shows that it is possible to develop joint solutions on a voluntary basis and through dialogue without resorting to complex coercive measures. Municipalities and counties can also outside ofCreate their own structures to promote cooperation and to make the administration closer to the citizens. The Lausitz Round is an example of how democratic participation, voluntary work and cooperation can lead to positive results – without any bureaucratic compulsion.
More citizenship, less compulsory
District reforms that are implemented without the involvement of the population often lead to alienation and create more problems than they solve. Instead of relying on coercion and merging, innovative, voluntary and citizen-oriented models should be promoted. Experience shows that sustainable and accepted solutions are achieved through dialogue, participation and voluntary cooperationcan become. After all, everyone benefits if administration is made transparent, understandable and close to the citizen – for a stronger community and a better future.
Screenshot youtube.com
