Politique canadienne

A21(d) - Federalism and Intergovernmental Politics

Date: Jun 5 | Heure: 03:30pm to 05:00pm | Salle:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Jennifer Wallner (University of Ottawa)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Jennifer Wallner (University of Ottawa)

Trade Attitudes and Federalism: A Study of Provincial Views on Trade with the United States in Canada: Diya Jiang (McGill University), Daniel Béland (McGill University)
Abstract: In recent decades, sub-federal actors have become increasingly active in the negotiation of international trade agreements. Particularly in Canada, provinces have not only participated in official trade negotiations such as USMCA but also directly promoted trade ties overseas. This reality has led to an increased scholarly interest in the federalization of trade, with many proposing the diverging regional economic interest with respect to free trade as the main motivation (Broschek et al., 2020). While this post-functionalist perspective has been tested in the European context (Dur et al., 2023), some scholars question its applicability in the Canadian context, especially given the global wave of trade politicization has occurred to a much lesser extent in Canada (Broschek & Goff, 2021). This study seeks to explore and understand the increased Canadian sub-federal level involvement from the lens of public opinion. Specifically, it investigates whether significant differences in trade attitudes, particularly with the United States exist across provinces and whether these attitudes align with varying levels of economic dependency on the US. I hypothesize that diverging provincial trade attitudes (if any) can be explained by factors such as trade exposure and political ideology. Adopting a quantitative approach, I analyze public opinion data from the Environics Institute’s 2022 survey alongside economic and demographic data from Statistics Canada. By examining the effects of economic exposure, political ideology, and regional trade interests, the research aims to provide invaluable insight into the increased federalization of trade and assesses the theoretical relevance of the post-functionalist explanation in Canada.

Federalism, The Party, and Human Capital: The Growth and Governance of Post-Secondary Education in Canada and Australia Compared: Brent Toye (York University), Thomas Klassen (York University)
Abstract: Starting from similar constitutional settlements, the governance and financing of higher education in Canada and Australia proceeded along different trajectories in the post-war period following the 'human capital revolution' of the late 1950s and early 1960s. Beginning with the Pearson Liberal government and accelerating under Pierre Trudeau's tenure as Prime Minister, the Canadian federal government took successive steps to relinquish most responsibility for post-secondary education that the central government had developed in the immediate post-war period. In Australia, on the other hand, the Commonwealth (i.e. federal) government made increasing in-roads towards governing the post-secondary education sector, culminating in the assumption of full financial responsibility in 1973 on the part of Gough Whitlam’s Labor Party. This paper challenges pre-existing interpretations of these different (de)centralization trajectories, rooted in sociological federalism or economic modernization theories, that locate the explanation primarily in structural factors. Rather, drawing on original archival research and a comparative-historical methodology, the paper argues that while these structural factors formed important background conditions, the political agency of partisan actors at crucial moments or junctures was essential in shaping the nature and extent of central government intervention in post-secondary education.

Not My Job: Audience Costs and Blame Games in the Implementation of International Agreements in Canada: Johannes Müller Gómez (McGill)
Abstract: Federal systems frequently encounter sub-federal resistance in the implementation of international agreements. This paper adapts the concept of audience costs from international relations to theorize sub-federal commitment to a federal government’s international obligations. Unlike the federal government, sub-federal governments can shield themselves from audience costs associated with international commitments and engage in blame games against the federal government when they were not directly involved in the negotiation process. The absence of audience costs at the sub-federal level not only fosters resistance from unwilling governments but also weakens the commitment of those with strong ownership over the policy objectives of the international agreement. This theoretical argument is empirically tested through a process-tracing analysis, examining the Clark and Horgan governments in British Columbia and the Notley and Kenney governments in Alberta during the implementation of the Paris Agreement. The findings reveal that even provinces with ambitious climate goals may deprioritize Canada's international commitments, prioritizing insulated provincial concerns, which can obstruct the overall implementation process – as illustrated by Horgan’s approach to the Trans Mountain pipeline extension. Conversely, provincial leaders opposing the agreement’s objectives can strategically shift blame onto the federal government, as demonstrated by Kenney’s resistance tactics. This analysis underscores the complexity of federal-provincial relations in the context of international agreements and demonstrates the broader relevance of the audience costs framework for understanding multilevel governance systems beyond Canada.