Gulyakov Alexander Dmitrievich, Candidate of juridical sciences, associate professor, Rector of Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), firstname.lastname@example.org
Salomatin Aleksey Yur'evich, Doctor of juridical sciences, doctor of historical sciences, professor, head of sub-department of state and law theory and political science, director of the center for comparative legal policy at Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), email@example.com
Background. Canada represents the so-called ‘mixed model of federalism’ when the state has been formed simultaneously from ‘the bottom’ due to the initiative of local elites and local people and from ‘the top’ due to the permission of the central imperial power. But what were the reasons and consequences of thi given model?
Materials and methods. The authors applied historical facts, political biographies, social and economic data description to demonstrate peculiarities and the dynamics of the Canadian model of federalism.
Results. It seems that economic and other pragmatic (not ideological) factors dominated in the process of federative state creation. The Canadian founding fathers refused to copy the American federative model with broad autonomy of the states. Not to forget they were especially disgusted with the Civil War (1861–1865) between the North and the South.
Conclusions. Officially the Canadian federation is strongly centralized. But in reality it’s a decentralized one. It’s instability and tendency for constant change is a result of its ’mixed model’ when the Canadian government, provinces and imperial London competed with each other. It was also impossible to preserve high degree of centralization in the face of a sharp contradiction between English speaking Canada and French speaking Canada. Frankly speaking, the Quebeck factor is a constant threat to the Canadian federalism.
models of federalism, Canadian federalism, history of the Canadian state, founding fathers of Canada, Quebek factor.
1. Danilov S. Yu. Istoriya Kanady [History of Canada]. Moscow, 2006.
2. Tishkov V. A. Strana klenovogo lista: nachalo istorii [The maple leaf country: early history]. Moscow, 1977.
3. Korf S. A. Gosudarstvennyy stroy Kanady [Canadian state system]. Moscow, 1911.
4. Ivshina I. N. Stanovlenie i razvitie kanadskogo federalizma [Formation and development of the Canadian federalism]. Kirov, 2007.
5. Martin G. The Confederation Debates in the Province of Canada, 1865. P. B. Waite. Monreal, 2006.
6. Smith P. J. Canadian Journal of Political Science. Revue Canadienne DeScience Politique. 20, pp. 3–29.
7. Mckay I. Canadian Historical Review. pp. 617–645.
8. Smith A. The Canadian Historical Review. 2008, vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 1–25.
9. Ajzenstat J. The Canadian Founding: John Locke and Parliament. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2007.
10. Creighton D. Y. A History of Canada. Boston, 1944.
11. Boltenkova L. F. Uchenie o federalizme i ego realizatsii v razvitii gosudarstv (vtoroe tysyacheletie do n.e. – nastoyashchee vremya) [The study of federalism and its implementation in development of states (the second millennium B.C. – present times)]. Moscow, 2006, bk. 1.
12. Wheare K. C. Canadian Federalism: Myth of Reality? Ed. by J. P. Meekison. 2 nd ed. Toronto, 1971.
13. Danilov S. Yu. Evolyutsiya kanadskogo federalizma [Evolution of the Canadian federalism]. Moscow: Dom Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, 2012.
14. Antonova I. F. Kanada: ekonomiko-geograficheskaya kharakteristika [Canada: geoeconomic characteristics]. Moscow, 1972, part 1.
15. Korh J. A. Public Administrationj Review. 1997, July-August, vol. 57, no. 4.
16. Stein M. Canadian Federalism: Myth or Reality? Ed. by J. P. Meekison. 2 nd ed. Toronto, 1971.
17. La Selva S. V. Canadian Journal of Political Science. Revue canadienne de science politique. 1993, vol. XXVI, no. 2 (June-July).
18. Berger C. The Writing of Canadian History. Toronto, 1976.