Can radical reforms ever produce lasting change in the French local governmental system? Or must France, as the adage goes, always remain the same? In the case of Socialist decentralization, the answers of systemic scholars have been unequivocal. As we have seen in the previous chapter, scholars who focus on local governmental institutions and processes suggest that the very real transformation of the formal institutions has led only to moderate changes in the informal processes, whereas scholars concerned with the local politico-administrative system insist that the system may have undergone some internal readjustment, but it has not changed. In the view of systemic scholars, the new pluralism evident in the new politics in the periphery or in the “decentralized dirigisme” in local economic development may have complicated the system, but it has not altered its basic structures or modes of functioning. For these scholars, decentralization appears at best, to borrow Michel Crozier's terms, an attempt to “change society by decree,” typical of the “blocked society.” But is this really the case?

In fact, we could argue, with apologies to Crozier, that Socialist decentralization is a case of la societe debloquee par decret, or “unblocking society by decree.” By changing the laws the way they did, the Socialists formalized much of the informal system. But in so doing, they did more than simply legalize the informal practices of the many actors in the local politico-administrative system.