I det nye strømlinjeformede universitetsframtid, hvor gammeldagse og lite
handlekraftige ledelsesordninger på institutt- og fakultetsnivå skal
erstattes med noe som er mer moderne og effektivt i følge Spjøtvoll/Giske,
kan man ha dem mistenkt dem for å ha hentet inspirasjon fra Encyclopaedia
Britannica. Se oppslag gjengitt nedenfor. Nå er ikke alle disse påfunnene
like populære i dag -- franskmennene f.eks. har jo fjernet de oppnevnte
prefekters makt.
De trenger nok et ORGUT for å gjenopplive ordninga.
Trond Andresen
******************************
Fra
Encyclopaedia Britannica:
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=115177&tocid=36703
political system; Typologies of government; National political systems;
Unitary nation-states
A great majority of all the world's nation-states are unitary systems,
including Belgium, Bulgaria, France, Great Britain, The Netherlands, Japan,
Poland, Romania, the Scandinavian countries, Spain, and many of the
Latin-American and African countries. There are great differences among
these unitary states, however, specifically in the institutions and
procedures through which their central governments interact with their
territorial subunits.
In one type of unitary system, decentralization of power among subnational
governments goes so far that in practice, although not in constitutional
principle, they resemble federal arrangements. In Great Britain, for
example, there are important elements of regional autonomy in the
relationship between Northern Ireland, Wales, and Scotland and the national
government in London; and the complex system of elected local governments,
although in constitutional theory subject to abrogation by Parliament, is in
practice a fixed and fairly formidable part of the apparatus of British
government. In other unitary systems of this type, decentralization on a
territorial basis is actually provided for constitutionally, and the powers
of locally elected officials are prescribed in detail. Thus, the Japanese
constitution, for example, specifies certain autonomous functions to be
performed by local administrative authorities.
A second type of unitary system makes substantially less provision for
territorial decentralization of authority and employs rather strict
procedures for the central supervision of locally elected governments. The
classic example of this type is France. Until March 1982, when a law on
decentralization went into effect, the French administrative system was
built around départements, each headed by a préfet, and subdivisions of the
départements, termed arrondissements, each headed by a sous-préfet. The
préfets and sous-préfets were appointed by the government in Paris to serve
as agents of the central government and also as the executives of the
divisional governments, the conseils généraux, which were composed of
elected officials. The system thus combined central supervision of local
affairs through appointed officials with territorial representation through
locally elected governments. (Following the passage of the decentralization
law, the executive powers of the préfets were transferred to the conseils
généraux.)
Yet a third type of unitary system provides for only token decentralization.
In such cases, the officials responsible for managing the affairs of the
territorial subdivisions are appointees of the central government, and the
role of locally elected officers is either minimal or nonexistent. Examples
of this kind of arrangement include Germany under Adolf Hitler and also
several formerly Communist countries. The Third Reich was divided into 42
Gaue, each headed by a gauleiter chosen for his personal loyalty to Hitler.
In eastern Europe, the people's councils or people's committees were named
by the centrally organized Communist parties; their appointment was
confirmed by elections with one slate of candidates.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 20-12-01 MET