Hollow State

The concept of a hollow state evokes a decline in the power of the state. The state is often thought of as a sovereign authority over a geographical area; it has the power to get much of what it wants done. In contemporary governance, the authority and power of the state are thought to have lessened. The state has become increasingly fragmented; it is less able to impose its will upon its territory.

Several processes have contributed to the hollowing out of the state. Some of the state's functions have moved upward to international and regional organizations such as the European Union (EU). Although nation-states remain important institutions, the growth [Page 419]of regional blocs, international law, and economic globalization have combined to limit their autonomy. Some of the state's functions have moved downward to local levels of government and to special purpose bodies. Devolution takes control of activities away from the center. Finally, some of the state's functions have moved outward as a result of the increased use of markets and networks as means of service delivery. Even when the state retains a dominant role within networks, it still has to enter negotiated relationships with organizations in civil society if it is to implement policies effectively.

The hollowing out of the state raises problems of accountability, fragmentation, and steering. First, representative democracies typically hold civil servants and agencies accountable to citizens by way of elected politicians. If these politicians are no longer able to control agencies, how is such accountability to operate? Second, the hollow state is fragmented in that decisions and services are made by numerous organizations, which often have different cultures. This fragmentation makes communication and coordination especially difficult. Third, when functions are transferred to other organizations, the state arguably needs to find ways of influencing and coordinating the various actions of these organizations. These problems arguably require politicians and civil servants to adopt new roles and new techniques if they are to govern effectively.

The concept of the hollow state has met with several criticisms. It has been argued that because the state voluntarily gave up functions, they are no loss. But one might reply that the concept seeks to describe the effects of actions irrespective of the motives for them. It has also been suggested that the state remains powerful because it retains regulatory control over many of the functions it appears to have lost. This criticism raises further questions about contemporary governance. How many of the lost functions are covered by regulatory bodies? Is the state able to steer regulatory bodies effectively? Have regulatory bodies been “captured” by those they are supposed to oversee?