This study examined the factors that influence a local government’s decision to engage in regional collaborations. Analysis of 7 local government managers and eleven elected officials revealed that the decision to engage in regional collaboration was influenced by external factors, organizational factors, and internal motivations. Elected officials and local government managers identified a disaster occurrence, fiscal stress, outside agencies, jurisdictional benefit, and communication as key factors. Further, this research highlights the importance of the role of the elected official in intergovernmental arrangements, the role of the local government manager as the policy entrepreneur, and the influence of shared norms and values.

<p>Regionalisation out of step - the varying growth of regional cooperation councils</p><p>Traditionally regionalisation is either seen as a bottom up movement or as state reform politics from above. From that perspective, Sweden contains both parts. The state enables regionalisation through legislation, promote it through policies and encourage it in rhetoric’s. But the formation of new regional institutions can only be done by the municipalities themselves. Without their belief in stronger and more self governed regions or their will to act and together build capacity in their region, the regionalisation is halted.</p><p>Sweden is a unitary state and there is no real tradition of strong and self governing regions. In that perspective the regional experiments during the second half of the 1990th can be seen as a rather big step. These experiments inspired other parts of Sweden and in the millennium shift, all counties was interested in forming some kind of selfgoverning regional body. In 2002, when legislation made it possible to build new political regional institutions, these new institutions were formed in seven counties. Since then, yet six counties have formed these new regional bodies. This variation raises several empirical questions. The main purpose of this study is to describe and explain the variation in growth of these new regional institutions.</p><p>The analysis follows three different perspectives. The first is a structural one and aims to investigate municipalities need for economic development as a driving force. The second is an institutional perspective where norms are supposed to promote cooperation. The third focus on promoting actors as a force behind the growth of new regional institutions. Through a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods this thesis shows that different kinds of social norms promoting collaboration are the most important factor in explaining the variation in growth of new regional institutions. The analysis also showed that political actors play an important, both in building and maintaining coopera-tive norms, and probably also in bridging the lack of them.</p>

Regionalisation out of step - the varying growth of regional cooperation councils Traditionally regionalisation is either seen as a bottom up movement or as state reform politics from above. From that perspective, Sweden contains both parts. The state enables regionalisation through legislation, promote it through policies and encourage it in rhetoric’s. But the formation of new regional institutions can only be done by the municipalities themselves. Without their belief in stronger and more self governed regions or their will to act and together build capacity in their region, the regionalisation is halted. Sweden is a unitary state and there is no real tradition of strong and self governing regions. In that perspective the regional experiments during the second half of the 1990th can be seen as a rather big step. These experiments inspired other parts of Sweden and in the millennium shift, all counties was interested in forming some kind of selfgoverning regional body. In 2002, when legislation made it possible to build new political regional institutions, these new institutions were formed in seven counties. Since then, yet six counties have formed these new regional bodies. This variation raises several empirical questions. The main purpose of this study is to describe and explain the variation in growth of these new regional institutions. The analysis follows three different perspectives. The first is a structural one and aims to investigate municipalities need for economic development as a driving force. The second is an institutional perspective where norms are supposed to promote cooperation. The third focus on promoting actors as a force behind the growth of new regional institutions. Through a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods this thesis shows that different kinds of social norms promoting collaboration are the most important factor in explaining the variation in growth of new regional institutions. The analysis also showed that political actors play an important, both in building and maintaining coopera-tive norms, and probably also in bridging the lack of them.

This project investigates the question of why local governments cooperate with one another for service provision and coordinated policies. It proposes that the selection of interlocal cooperation among local leaders in the Unites States can be best understood as a diffusion process by which local elites learn from the cooperative experiments of neighboring jurisdictions and reproduce them in order to realize similar gains when it makes sense to do so. This process, I argue, is driven by the mechanisms of learning, development of networks of trust, and interlocal competition. The project presents theory, methods, and results in three manuscripts. The first uses a newly constructed longitudinal dataset of financial transfers by local governments to show that localities are more likely to cooperate when larger shares of their neighbors were cooperating in the past. This process is amplified in regions with more intense interlocal competition. The second manuscript demonstrates that the diffusion of cooperation is most intense within particular types of local service provision, namely those that involve capital-intensive and system-maintenance functions of government, such as highways, sewers, and water delivery. Finally, the third paper presents results from an original, national survey of mayors and councilors that involved embedded experiments to tease out the hypothesized mechanisms of diffusion. Findings provide strong support for the role of development of trust and learning in the spread of interlocal cooperation. / Political Science