There is a direct connection between the country’s political organization and its economic capability; through the organization of communication and transportation networks, arrangements for land tenure systems, etc. the state takes care of enhancing human opportunity, exploiting natural resources, etc. An efficient communication system is of strategic importance for political and economic cohesiveness, and Canada is in a beneficial position in this aspect because of its most advanced one. Speaking about the political system’s effect on the economy, it is possible to state that unitary states benefit much more from their political organization than federal states do:
“Unitary states such as Japan and France enjoy a high level of internal homogeneity and cohesiveness. But some unitary states such as Spain and South Africa, lack social homogeneity and are geographically large enough to warrant federal systems”.
There are the following types of federal systems in the modern period of time: centralized (e.g. The Republic of Argentina, Brazil), mature (e.g. the Commonwealth of Australia, Belgium), and conciliatory/cooperative (e.g. Canada). It is possible to state that the first type of federal system corresponds to the one a military state should have for a number of reasons. First of all, it is important to note that each type differs in the measure of autonomy the sub-nations have, and the level of powers that sub-national governments possess. In the case of the centralized federal system, it is true that the state with such a system usually has strong centralized authority, and sub-national authorities have nominal functions and do not participate in the formation of national policies at all.