Consociationalism, Power Sharing, and Politics at the Center

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Wolff
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Ethnic Conflict ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Divided Societies ◽  
Sustainable Peace ◽  
Complex Power

For more than four decades, advocates of consociationalism and their opponents have been engaged in a debate over about how to design institutions to achieve sustainable peace in divided societies. In general, existing theories acknowledge the importance and usefulness of institutional design in conflict resolution, but offer rather different prescriptions as to the most appropriate models to achieve stable conflict settlements. Three such theories are of particular significance: power sharing in the form of its liberal consociational variant, centripetalism, and power dividing. Consociationalism, centripetalism, and power dividing offer a range of distinct prescriptions on how to ensure that differences of identity do not translate into violence. They often go beyond “politics at the center” and also provide arguments on territorial dimensions of ethnic conflict settlement. Practitioners of conflict resolution recognize the need to combine a range of different mechanisms, giving rise to an emerging practice of conflict settlement known as “complex power sharing.” None of the three theories of conflict resolution fully captures this current practice of complex power sharing, even as liberal consociationalism appears to be the most open to incorporation of elements of centripetalism and power dividing. A theory of complex power sharing would need to explain why there is empirical support for a greater mix of institutions than existing theories recommend.

scholarly journals Building Bridges in Divided Societies: Sustaining Democratic Transition Through Complex Power-Sharing in Lebanon and Iraq

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 18-32
Author(s):  
Petros Petrikkos
Keyword(s):  
Hybrid Model ◽  
Democratic Transition ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Divided Societies ◽  
Complex Power ◽  
Fragile Environment

This paper looks at how divided societies like Lebanon and Iraq currently incorporate very fragile models of governance. The recommendations in this study attempt to introduce a hybrid model that considers integration and consociationalism as effective tools to electoral management in both countries, in light of the recent elections taking place in May 2018, and the continuities presented to this day. In assessing the effectiveness of consociationalism as a power-sharing framework, this paper does not attempt to depart from the already-established model of governance. Rather, the analysis presents elements that would hopefully improve power-sharing and governance in the two divided societies of Lebanon and Iraq. Elements as such may bring forth a steadier process that aids democratic transition in divided societies. Sectarianism is heavily embedded in both the Lebanese and Iraqi communities. Ignoring the conflicting issues that rise with each successive election only promotes a fragile environment that deeply divides, instead of uniting societies.

scholarly journals The plight of civic parties in divided societies

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cera Murtagh
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Empirical Reality ◽  
Divided Societies ◽  
Mediating Role ◽  
Ethnic Parties ◽  
Marginalised Groups ◽  
Governance Models ◽  
The Relationship

Civic political parties in divided societies occupy an ambiguous place in the power-sharing literature. Scholarship tends to focus on ethnic parties and assumes civic actors to be marginal. The empirical reality tells a different story: civic parties have contributed to peace, stability and democracy in some of the world’s most deeply divided places by playing a mediating role, acting as a moderating force and representing otherwise marginalised groups. Drawing from interviews with representatives from civic parties, ethnic parties and civil society in Northern Ireland and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and broader institutional analysis, I argue that civic parties’ survival can be explained by the fact that they meet therein not only with barriers but also critical openings. They adapt to this opportunity structure, with different party types developing under different forms of power-sharing. In illustrating the relationship between governance models and civic parties, this article underlines the importance of post-settlement institutional design.

scholarly journals “Under the Radar”: How is the Jewish–Arab Conflict Reflected in Internal Jewish Dialogue?

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Lipaz Shamoa-Nir
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Social Context ◽  
Ethnic Conflict ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Intergroup Conflict ◽  
Identity Exploration ◽  
Exploration Process ◽  
Divided Societies ◽  
Arab Students

This study explores the role of intergroup conflict in the identity exploration process among 83 Jewish participants in a dialogue in a multicultural college in Israel. Thematic analysis has shown that the behavior of most of the participants has been affected by the Jewish–Arab conflict as follows: they centered on internal commonalities among Jewish subgroups; they neither engaged in conflict among Jewish subgroups nor explored their Jewish identities, and they expressed confusion regarding who the out-group was: the Jewish subgroups’ members or the Arab students in the college. These findings expand the knowledge about the identity exploration process in a social context of religious–ethnic conflict and may pose a practical contribution to the field of intergroup dialogues and conflict resolution in divided societies.   

Ending the impasse in Kosovo: partition, decentralization, or consociationalism?

2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 867-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Rossi
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Ethnic Conflict ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Central Authority ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
The North ◽  
International Recognition

This paper argues that current Western-backed approaches to conflict resolution in Kosovo have failed to alter Serbia's policy toward the region and have contributed to the exacerbation of political tensions between Belgrade and Brussels, while deepening ethnic cleavages between Serb and Albanian communities. While there is no possibility of Kosovo returning to Serbia's control, there is an equal unlikelihood that Serbian-populated regions of Kosovo, especially the north, will submit to Pristina's authority. Most importantly, there is little hope that Kosovo can gain full international recognition and membership in international organizations without a compromise settlement with Serbia. While territorial partition has long been a suggested option, I conclude that the best possible solution for Kosovo, given the positions of all parties involved, is a process of significant decentralization beyond the internationally supported measures in the Ahtisaari Plan. A model of consociational power sharing is one in which Serbian and Albanian municipalities are granted high levels of autonomy similar to arrangements made for Bosnia. While this solution may not be ideal and further weakens central authority, I argue that consociationalism reduces the problems of ethnic conflict, encourages local self-government, and preserves the overall territorial integrity of Kosovo.

The Myth of Consociationalism? Conflict Reduction in Divided Societies

2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (12) ◽  
pp. 1542-1571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Selway ◽  
Kharis Templeman
Keyword(s):  
Political Violence ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Electoral Rules ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Divided Societies ◽  
Institutional Effects ◽  
Data Limitations ◽  
Conflict Reduction ◽  
Cross Country

Although advocates of consociationalism have asserted that there is solid empirical evidence supporting the use of power-sharing institutions in divided societies, previous quantitative tests of these theories suffer from serious data limitations and fail to take into account the conditional nature of institutional effects. The authors test the effect of (a) proportional representation (PR) over majoritarian electoral rules, (b) parliamentary over presidential or semipresidential arrangements, and (c) a federal over a unitary system in reducing conflict in a cross-country data set of 101 countries representing 106 regimes. The results undercut much of the previous empirical support for consociationalist arrangements in divided societies. Using a multiplicative specification, the authors find that PR and parliamentarism appear to exacerbate political violence when ethnic fractionalization is high, though the effect of federalism is less certain.

“Mission impossible”: exploring the viability of power-sharing as a conflict-resolution tool in Syria

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emer Groarke
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Negotiated Settlement ◽  
Sustainable Peace ◽  
Viable Model ◽  
Theoretical Overview ◽  
Research Analysis

Purpose – This paper aims to show the viability of consociational power-sharing as a conflict-resolution tool in Syria. It further argues that a subsequent movement from consociational to centripetal power-sharing is vital to ensure sustainable peace. Design/methodology/approach – A theoretical overview of power-sharing as a conflict-resolution tool provides the basis for this paper, supported by empirical evidence and qualitative research analysis for its proposed application in Syria. Perceived obstacles to a negotiated settlement are outlined, with suggestions made as to how these issues can be transformed into incentives for invested parties. Such obstacles include Bashar al-Assad remaining in power, and calls for the implementation of Shari’a law by some opposition groups. Findings – While previously the conditions of the conflict were not conducive to peace talks, this paper finds that regional developments, including the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, have re-opened the possibility of, and indeed the necessity for, political negotiations. Detailing the complexity of a conflict that goes far beyond a mere sectarian divide, the findings of this paper dispel the notion that a sectarian partition is a viable model for Syria. The paper highlights the multiple cleavages occurring simultaneously, and shows how a power-sharing model is best suited to deal with them. Originality/value – The paper analyses the ongoing inertia of political negotiations to peacefully resolve the conflict. It offers an approach to conflict-resolution in Syria that has, thus far, not been adequately considered in academic – or political – spheres.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document