The political history of Île-de-France is a subject of debate, in particular because historical studies are still lacking or incomplete on a number of topics. According to many historians (Fourcaut et al. 2006), for example, there is a considerable imbalance between the number of historical studies on Paris, which are very numerous, and the much smaller number on its suburbs. This chapter takes no sides and forms no part of a debate between historians, since I have neither the legitimacy nor the desire to do so. The aim is rather, as a preliminary to the chapters that follow, to help readers understand the historical background to the system and political organization of Île-de-France and to identify the aspects that partly explain the main public policies pursued up to the present day (Chapter 6) and the problems of the relations between the actors concerned (Chapter 7). Three national factors and three factors specific to the situation of Île-de-France are worth noting in this respect.

First, France – and Île-de-France is no exception to the rule – has a political culture ruled by neocorporatism; in other words, a conception of the relations between actors in which the state appears dominant and in which it grants certain organizations a monopoly to represent the interests of social and economic forces. For example, the chambers of commerce and industry (CCIs) are entitled to represent the private economic sector, and in this capacity they are the primary interlocutors for government and local authorities in all public policies that affect companies. The outcome of this is the establishment of a comprehensive, highly institutionalized system of representational bodies, which plays an important role in territorial governance and in the governance of Île-de-France in particular.

Second, France's political and institutional system is largely based on state domination. It is historically well known that France is a highly centralized unitary nation in which the state possesses primary legitimacy and political authority, which it exercises across the country through a whole array of institutions and agencies under its control. Since this set-up is largely inherited from the Napoleonic era, it is what is usually called the Napoleonic system.