The meaning of regionalization: why federalism is a problem for Belgian Dutch-speakers in times of democratic malaise

Why might citizens express support for regionalization in theory while resisting further devolution in practice? Research on the devolution paradox has largely addressed such tensions by disentangling the various understandings of the dependent variable, specifically by nuancing regional authority into shared versus self-rule. Yet the everyday meanings citizens attach to “regionalization” remain underexamined. Drawing on focus groups with Dutch speaking Belgians (n=43) conducted in 2008 and 2018, this article reconstructs meaning of regionalization. Uncovering a surprisingly negative colloquial connotation of the concept, it analyses the narrative repertoires through which citizens make sense of regionalization in relation to their everyday encounters with multilevel governance. Beyond familiar identitarian and utilitarian accounts, the analysis identifies a third, cynical narrative in which regionalization is framed as serving political elites rather than citizens and as symptomatic of democratic malaise. This affective register suggests that attitudes toward multilevel governance partly reflect diffuse evaluations of democratic performance, helping explain why regional authority can be endorsed as a remedy for representation and responsiveness while further devolution is resisted as an untrustworthy or dysfunctional reform process.