Enshrined in the 1976 Constitution, and even put to a referendum but never implemented, regionalisation in Portugal has been systematically ignored, making our country one of the few in the EU not divided up into regions. Over the years, there has never been a serious discussion on the subject, and there seems to be a tacit desire from successive central governments to keep the issue a taboo.

Portugal is one of the most centralised countries in the OECD, rivalling Greece in this regard, another country facing development challenges. Although our small geographical size might give the impression this centralism is not problematic, the reality is that from north to south, including the islands, the social, economic, and geographical characteristics are distinct, and therefore the needs of each region are, too. The lack of an administrative division by regions prevents each area from adapting policies and strategies to its specific realities, which could promote more balanced development in the country.

The central state has tried to address these differences by decentralising tasks to municipalities, but not real powers. There is no transfer of authority to regions, which remain highly dependent on directives from the central government.

A striking example of this approach is the situation around “Juntas de Freguesia” (parish councils). While these structures are seen as an important link in local administration, in practice, they have little or no autonomy. Most residents’ concerns are referred to the municipal councils, and the few powers given to parish councils do not truly justify their existence.

The resistance to regionalisation seems to be linked to several myths and fears, such as undermining territorial cohesion, increasing expenditure, or creating additional bureaucracy.

However, this is where the principle of subsidiarity becomes relevant. This principle argues that decisions should be made at the closest possible level to the people, ensuring that regions have the autonomy necessary to address their specific issues, with the central government intervening only when regions are unable to act effectively.

Madeira, for example, with its differentiated tax regime and “Zona Franca” (Free Trade Zone), demonstrates how regional autonomy can be used to adapt fiscal and economic policies to local needs, attracting investment and promoting development. Although Madeira's tax regime was agreed upon with the central government, it illustrates the potential of regionalisation in Portugal to create policies which better respond to the particularities of each region while maintaining national cohesion.

There is no reason to fear that regionalisation would undermine the cohesion of the territory, since it does not seek to create a state, but rather to bring power closer to the people, making it more agile and transparent and allowing for development according to the specificities of each region, contributing to a more developed country overall.

If this transition is made with proper organisation and rigour, with the clear goal of not increasing public spending, it is possible to establish specific rules for this purpose. For example, the funds allocated to the operation of services should not exceed those already allocated at the central level; the creation of a regional finance law similar to the existing local finance law, and limiting regional deficits.

In essence, it would be beneficial for local authorities to stop being mere observers in matters where they have a say. In January of this year, Porto wanted to reorganise traffic, which involved imposing tolls for heavy vehicles on the VCI. In this extremely local matter, it was awaiting action from the central government. In another example with greater economic impact on the region, in the case of the Port of Sines in 2021, the mayor of Sines complained the Port of Lisbon was receiving investment and attention while the Port of Sines was being overlooked, harming Alentejo’s competitiveness.

The fact that a local governor does not have the power to act on such direct matters demonstrates a lack of trust from politicians beyond Terreiro do Paço, a legacy of the Estado Novo's centralism. This environment of mutual distrust between local governments and the central government contributes more to national disunity than some fear regionalisation might cause. Local authorities can’t continue to be relegated to the position of mere executors of measures dictated by Lisbon, with or without their agreement. In significant matters concerning each region's prosperity, it is up to the locals to take responsibility.

Despite the request from the National Association of Portuguese Municipalities to the prime minister to move forward with the creation of administrative regions being rejected, reinforcing the fact that decentralisation is prioritised over regionalisation, the debate on the country's administrative organisation remains crucial. It is important for citizens to participate actively in the discussion on the future of regionalisation in Portugal so that this issue is not just a forgotten constitutional promise, but a reality which can contribute to more balanced development across the country.

No issue can be ignored indefinitely when it is at the centre of social debate.

Until then, Portugal remains behind.

Author

Cláudia Nunes - Presidente of LOLA Portugal | Fellow Young Voices Europe."

Cláudia Nunes