William Riker on federalism: sometimes wrong but more right than anyone else?

This article reviews the contribution made by William H. Riker to the study of federalism. It concludes that Riker's claim that federalism is always a result of a collective response to external or internal threats to dominant central and regional coalitions needs to be qualified to include economic and cultural threats. The EU and Australian examples demonstrate this. Riker was also mistaken about the precise origins of Indian federation, which owed more to the hegemony of a centralist Congress Party than to central local bargaining. Riker was less specific on the factors that account for the sustainability of federations although his emphasis on the role of political parties has proved helpful. The article concludes that any attempt to build a general theory on the sustainability of federal systems has so far proved elusive. This is demonstrated by an analysis of the role of upper houses, direct democracy and parties in maintaining federal systems of government