Cities or Nations, which is better governance?

Are cities a better locus of government than nations?

Which is to say, there have been some serious drawbacks to the relatively new concept of nationhood, including but not limited to:
1. arbitrary borders not matching tribal/social divisions
2. border control and passports
3. arbitrary limits on economic opportunity and migration
What are some of the benefits of nationhood?

What are some of the potential drawbacks of city-based governance?
What might be the benefits?

Here's a TED talk touting the idea:




Here in the recent news is an interesting example of city-government acting on the world stage. When the US government pulled out from the Paris accords on June 1, suddenly on the same day the "US Climate Alliance" was announced.

Check this out:


From the Wikipedia page:
which was just posted on June 3, 2017 (Literally 2 days ago from the time of this post! The alliance was formed June 1st, the wiki about it 2 days later. Wow.)

The United States Climate Alliance is a bipartisan group of states in the United States that are committed to upholding the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change within their borders, by achieving the U.S. goal of reducing emissions 26–28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025 and meeting or exceeding the targets of the federal Clean Power Plan.

The member states, which make up 25.7% of the U.S. population and 31.0% of U.S. GDP as of 2016, emitted 14.2% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions in 2014.[3][4]

History
The alliance was formed on June 1, 2017, in response to the announcement earlier that day by U.S. President Donald Trump that he had decided to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. The formation of the alliance was thereupon announced by three state governors: Jay Inslee of Washington, Andrew Cuomo of New York, and Jerry Brown of California. The association is not a legally binding treaty, but a group of state governments with similar policies regarding climate change.[5] A press statement released by Inslee states that "New York, California and Washington, representing over one-fifth of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, are committed to achieving the U.S. goal of reducing emissions 26–28 percent from 2005 levels and meeting or exceeding the targets of the federal Clean Power Plan." These three states are governed by the Democratic Party, although both New York's and California's governorship will be on the ballot in the United States gubernatorial elections, 2018.

By the evening of June 1 the state governors of seven other U.S. states had agreed to maintain their states' support for the Paris Agreement. Nearly 70 percent of Americans, including a majority of people in all 50 states, support the Paris Agreement on climate change.[6]

On June 2, Governor Dan Malloy announced that Connecticut would join the United States Climate Alliance.[7] On the same day, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker became the first Republican governor to bring his state into the alliance.[8] Governor Phil Scott of Vermont, another Republican, said his state would join.[9] Governor Gina Raimondo said Rhode Island would also join.[10] Governor Kate Brown said that Oregon would join[11]. Governor David Y. Ige of Hawaii announced that Hawaii would also join, making them the 9th state in the Alliance.[12]



No comments:

Post a Comment