Political Science

Dredge, D  Jenkins, J (2003). FederalState Relations and Tourism Public Policy, New South
Wales, Australia. Current Issues in Tourism Vol. 6, No 5, 2003. Retrieved February 28,
2010 from httpciteseerx.ist.psu.eduviewdocdownloaddoi10.1.1.130.7367reprep1typepdf

The purpose of this article was to examine Federal-State relations in the tourism sector of New South Wales (NSW). There were barriers posed by Federalism as a result of overlapping jurisdictions and conflicting accountabilities, and Dredge  Jenkins (2003) investigated the personalities and institutions involved in an effort to find ways that could improve co-operation. Data for this research was obtained from statistical sources, parliamentary debates, and policy documents that span the period 1960-2000. Further, the concept of Federalism and intergovernmental relations in the tourism sector was examined, with particular emphasis on policy making.

The authors found that, between 1976-1989, there was increasing awareness that tourism growth was of national importance. However, States maintained sovereign control in tourism development, promotion, and marketing due to the limited intergovernmental dialogue existing in policy making in the sector. There was considerable overlap in policy making recognized by the NSW government while trying to develop a regional planning framework, thus a need was seen for a policy shift in 1993. Control of tourism policy making is, however, still maintained by the States despite Federal government injection of capital in the tourism industry, and the recognition that lack of coordination is an impediment. The authors recommended a more balanced interpretation of tourism policy at the Federal level, and more open communication and sharing of issues by administrative policy makers in order to build sustainable networks of cooperation between the Federal and State government of NSW.

This study is limited because while it is relevant in the Australian context, the findings may not apply elsewhere. Further, the research was conducted over ten years ago and has since been overtaken by events. However, the findings are crucial for the study of specific impediments to tourism growth in Federal systems of government, for instance, state control over domestic policy but federal control over the tax base (Mclean, 2002). With inadequate means of revenue, states in a federal system may face difficulty developing their tourism sector. More research is required to identify areas where Federal-State cooperation can address this issue.

Hampton, M, Jeonglyeol Lee, T  Riley, M (2008, December). Conflict in Tourism
Development. Kent Business School. Working Paper No.170, December 2008. Retrieved
February 28, 2010 from
httpkar.kent.ac.uk231131Hampton_Lee_26_Riley_WP170_Conflict_in_Tourism_Dec08.pdf

This paper explored the disadvantages of common goals when based on conflicting power relationships in a cultural heritage site in South Korea. It examined the relationships between the central, provincial and local governments, the local community and other stakeholders, particularly entrepreneurs. Their attitudes, conflicts and barriers to collaboration were investigated.

The data collected was based on a qualitative research on historical records, media reports, and interviews of stakeholders in the Baekje History Reproduction Complex (BHRC) based in Buyeo County. Even though interviews were conducted and appropriated to particular groups, the data was incomplete because all individuals in stakeholder groups could not be accommodated.

On analysis, the authors found that all groups were dependent on the central government whose representatives in the project felt that they had a heavy responsibility that was not appreciated by the other groups, and the provincial government was receiving too many demands from the local residents but had insufficient funds to oblige them. The locals, on the other hand, were frustrated with the low compensation for relics found on their properties, and in addition, they were disillusioned at the lack of progress since construction began. The most important group, the entrepreneurs, was unwilling to commit funds to a project whose status was uncertain. Consequently, the authors determined that there was mutual distrust among stakeholders and they pointed fingers at each other for the stalled project. The authors recommended that where collective action is required in a tourism project, initial stakeholder research should be conducted to identify potential areas of conflict, and a collaborative framework within the context of authority structures should be prioritized. According to Brooks, Milne  Johansson (2002), stakeholder research deals with the perceptions diverse groups have on the end product.

The primary shortcoming in this study exists in the subjective nature of qualitative research. Further, the authors admitted that the amount of data was incomplete due to the large number of interviewees who could not be accommodated. Despite these limitations, the study is informative, particularly for stakeholders in newly industrialized and third world countries where authority is centralized and collaborative tools are required among stakeholders. Further research is required to determine the specific tools needed for the different forms of governance.

Warren, N (2006, March). Benchmarking Australias Intergovernmental Fiscal Arrangements
Interim Report. Commissioned by New South Wales Treasury. Retrieved February 28,
2010 from
httpwww.treasury.nsw.gov.au__dataassetspdf_file00075794int-bench-rep.pdf

This article examines fiscal federalism in Australia as compared to other federal countries. It compares the forms of taxation in Australia with taxes in other federations at three government levels national, state, and local government. The authors gathered data from the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) National Accounts for Australia, Belgium and Germany, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Governance Finance Yearbook 2003 for Australia, Canada, Switzerland, and the U.S. This data was on sub-national government spending, expenditure on health and education at different levels of government, vertical fiscal analysis in Australia, and sharing of taxes in Australia by sub-national governments. Further, a comparison of revenues generated at sub-national level in Australia as a percentage of its expenditure was compared to other countries.

Among the key findings were (a) most federal countries are committed to fiscal equalization (b) Australia has been moving toward fiscal centralization as compared to most federal countries which are decentralizing and (c) horizontal fiscal equalization in Australia is not as extensive as that in other federal states and tax instruments available at sub-national levels were inadequate to meet demands at the local level. Thus, the tax base at the state level is poor and most states have to rely on grants from the federal government. For instance, the federal government monopolizes income tax (Mclean, 2002). Most other countries with a federal system enjoy greater fiscal autonomy.

This study has thrown light on federal systems of governments which do not enjoy fiscal autonomy at the local level. The example of Australia is particularly relevant for emerging economies intent on selecting effective forms of fiscal governance at a local level. Despite disadvantages in the Australian model of fiscal centralization, there is a need for further research to examine possible disadvantages in fiscal decentralization as practiced in most federal states.