“Cascadia is a positive and inclusive, place-based drive focused on building autonomous and equitable local infrastructure that is both resilient and sustainable. This action is based on the idea of transcending arbitrary state borders and shifting our drive and impacts locally. We love Cascadia the way it is NOW! defined by nature, culture, and place-based actions.” — CascadiaNow.org

Centralized governance results in policies disconnected from reality, like planting a cactus in a rainforest because, on paper, it looks like “plant-friendly” land. Autonomous regions flip this model: decisions should be made as close as possible to the people and places they affect.

Historically, human societies were organized around local governance. Indigenous nations, city-states, and tribal councils made decisions based on intimate knowledge of their environment and community needs. This wasn’t just tradition—it was practical. People who live in a region understand its climate, culture, and economy better than distant officials.

Yet modern nation-states have favored centralization. Industrialization, globalization, and political consolidation have created governance models where policies are standardized across vast territories, often ignoring local realities. Federal agricultural subsidies designed for industrial farming in the Midwest make little sense for small farms in New England. Urban planning strategies that work in Los Angeles are disastrous in rural Appalachia.

The European Union demonstrates both the potential and pitfalls of regional autonomy. While it promotes cooperation, its bureaucracy often feels disconnected from the realities of citizens in Greece, Poland, or Ireland. The tension between centralized authority and regional self-governance remains a challenge.

But decentralization doesn’t mean dismantling national governments—it means rebalancing power. In Spain, autonomous regions like Catalonia and the Basque Country control education, health care, and cultural policies. Switzerland’s cantonal system allows local decision-making on taxation and infrastructure, contributing to high levels of civic engagement and political stability.

Autonomous regions don’t exist in isolation but operate within broader governance structures. They negotiate power-sharing agreements with state and national governments, ensuring that policies align with local needs while maintaining national cohesion. Regional governments handle land use, economic development, and social services while coordinating with larger entities on broader matters like trade, infrastructure, and environmental protection.

The U.S. already has natural regions, though political boundaries fail to recognize them. The Great Lakes region—spanning Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania—shares common environmental and economic concerns, particularly regarding water management and industrial recovery. The Pacific Northwest, stretching from northern California to British Columbia, is bound by forestry, fishing, and technology industries. The Mississippi Delta faces unique agricultural and ecological challenges. Yet these regions remain governed by distant legislatures that fail to reflect their specific needs.

The environmental argument for regional autonomy is compelling. Political borders don’t align with watersheds, bioregions, or climate zones. National environmental policies often neglect local ecological knowledge. Bioregionalism—a movement advocating governance based on ecological boundaries—suggests that sustainability requires regional decision-making.

Consider the Columbia River Basin. Its health is critical to Indigenous communities, fisheries, agriculture, and hydropower. Yet centralized control has led to mismanagement, legal disputes, and ecological degradation. A regional governance model, rooted in bioregional principles, could integrate diverse stakeholders and prioritize sustainability.

Decentralization also strengthens resilience. In an era of climate change, pandemics, and economic instability, local systems adapt faster than centralized bureaucracies. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted this: cities and regions with strong local governance often responded more effectively than national governments mired in political gridlock. Kerala, a state in India, managed the crisis efficiently through decentralized health systems and community-based interventions, outperforming wealthier regions.

Critics warn that regional autonomy risks fragmentation or inequality. But rigid centralization is equally harmful, stifling innovation and ignoring local needs. The key is balance: maintaining national unity while allowing regions flexibility to govern themselves.

Economically, decentralized regions tailor policies to local industries, labor markets, and resources. The Emilia-Romagna region in Italy thrives on cooperative economics, supporting small businesses and worker-owned enterprises. This contrasts with areas dependent on distant corporate headquarters or government subsidies.

Culturally, regional autonomy preserves diversity. Languages, traditions, and arts flourish when communities control education and cultural policies. The Gaelic revival in Scotland and Ireland, Indigenous language resurgence in New Zealand, and protection of minority languages in Canada’s provinces show how local governance nurtures cultural richness.

Legal frameworks for regional autonomy vary. Federal systems like the U.S., Germany, and India grant constitutional powers to subnational entities. But even unitary states can decentralize. The UK’s devolution process transferred significant authority to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

Digital platforms can enable participatory budgeting, direct democracy, and localized decision-making that was previously impossible. Education plays a role too. Civic literacy, local history, and environmental education foster regional identity and responsibility. When people understand their unique challenges and strengths, they engage more deeply in governance and community-building.

Regional autonomy is about rethinking governance itself. It challenges the notion that bigger is always better, proposing instead that strength comes from adaptability, diversity, and local knowledge.

Therefore, under Folklaw:

Autonomous geographical regions shall be established with authority over local policies, natural resource management, cultural preservation, and public services. Regional governments will operate within a cooperative framework that ensures environmental sustainability and social equity.

Economic planning and environmental policies will structure around ecological boundaries, cultural regions, and community needs. Decision-making will prioritize local participation, transparency, and Indigenous tribal input.

Education systems will emphasize regional history, culture, civic engagement, and a sense of place.