Abstract
Lijphart’s commitment to bringing stability to plural societies has led him to write extensively about consociation in a body of literature published over more than four decades. Scientifically sound quantitative analysis of his theory of consociation requires systematic identification of its elements. This chapter demonstrates that his central claim is that “consociation promotes stability in plural societies.” It also shows that he has consistently described consociation as consisting of four core components: grand coalition, segmental autonomy, proportionality, and minority veto power. The exact meanings of these terms as they are used by Lijphart are precisely described. Consideration of common criticisms of Lijphart’s work in this area emphasizes that quantitative operationalization of the theory of consociationalism and the system’s components is a valuable contribution in itself.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Lijphart (1998, p. 144).
- 2.
O’Leary (2005, p. 4).
- 3.
O’Leary (2005, p. 4).
- 4.
O’Leary (2005, pp. 5–6).
- 5.
O’Leary (2005, p. 7).
- 6.
& These sources, as well as those mentioned in footnote 50, are discussed at length on the website.
- 7.
Academic contributions by Karl Renner , W. Arthur Lewis , Lorwin , and Lehmbruch provide further evidence that Lijphart’s core concept is one that makes intuitive sense to many people, who came to agree with it from varied international perspectives. It emphasizes that many of consociation’s core components have been consistently associated with one another, by Lijphart and other scholars who appear to have worked independently of him.
- 8.
Bogaards (1998, p. 499).
- 9.
Lijphart (1991, p. 499).
- 10.
- 11.
Lijphart (1989, p. 142).
- 12.
Taylor (1994, p. 167).
- 13.
- 14.
Lijphart (1998, p. 149).
- 15.
Lijphart (1985, p. 503).
- 16.
Lijphart (1977, p. 25).
- 17.
Lijphart (1977, p. 1).
- 18.
Boulle (1984, p. 45).
- 19.
Lijphart (1977, p. 25).
- 20.
Lijphart (1977, p. 125).
- 21.
Lijphart (1977, p. 148).
- 22.
Lijphart (1977, pp. 151, 152).
- 23.
Lijphart (1996a, pp. 258–261).
- 24.
Lijphart (1996b, p. 261).
- 25.
Lijphart (1977, pp. 25, 31).
- 26.
Lijphart (1977, p. 31).
- 27.
Lijphart (1996b, pp. 259–260).
- 28.
Lijphart (1989, p. 141).
- 29.
Linz (1992, p. 124).
- 30.
Lijphart (1992, p. 217).
- 31.
Lijphart (1991, p. 494).
- 32.
Kieve (1981, p. 315).
- 33.
Lijphart (1977, p. 36).
- 34.
Knox (1995, p. 4).
- 35.
McRae (1974, p. 5).
- 36.
Lijphart (1977, p. 41).
- 37.
Halpern (1986, p. 191).
- 38.
Lijphart (1989, p. 141).
- 39.
Gabel (1998, p. 463).
- 40.
Steiner (1981, p. 1241).
- 41.
Steiner (1981, p. 1242).
- 42.
Halpern (1986, p. 192).
- 43.
Lijphart (1991, p. 499).
- 44.
Lijphart (1998, p. 144).
- 45.
Lijphart (1995, p. 281).
- 46.
Lijphart (1995, p. 281).
- 47.
Lijphart (1995, p. 281).
- 48.
Lijphart (1995, p. 281).
- 49.
Lijphart (1995, p. 282).
- 50.
Lijphart (1995, p. 282).
- 51.
Lijphart (1995, p. 282).
- 52.
Lijphart (1977, p. 25).
- 53.
(Lijphart 1977, p. 25).
- 54.
Halpern (1986, p. 191) pointed out that subcultures would not be represented proportionally, unless political parties perfectly corresponded to subcultures’ boundaries.
- 55.
Lijphart (1996b, p. 261).
- 56.
Lijphart (1989, p. 141).
- 57.
Lijphart (1991, p. 507).
- 58.
- 59.
Lijphart (1977, pp. 36–37).
- 60.
- 61.
Lijphart (1977, p. 37).
- 62.
Lijphart (1991, p. 495).
- 63.
Lijphart (1977, p. 38).
- 64.
- 65.
- 66.
Hudson (1988, p. 227).
- 67.
The italics shown here did not exist in the original text.
- 68.
Lijphart (1979, p. 501).
- 69.
Barry (1975b, p. 129).
- 70.
Lustick (1979, p. 330).
- 71.
Daalder (1974, pp. 615–618).
- 72.
Barry (1975b, p. 487).
- 73.
Boynton and Kwon (1978, pp. 11, 24).
- 74.
Boynton and Kwon (1978, pp. 21, 25).
- 75.
Boynton and Kwon (1978, p. 25).
- 76.
Barry (1975b, p. 500).
- 77.
Van Schendelen (1984, p. 32).
- 78.
Lijphart (2002, p. 41).
- 79.
Lijphart (2002, p. 41).
- 80.
Lijphart (2002, p. 41).
- 81.
- 82.
Lijphart (2002, p. 44).
- 83.
- 84.
Lijphart (1977, p. 165).
- 85.
Horowitz (1985, p. 573).
- 86.
Horowitz (1985, p. 575).
- 87.
Horowitz (1991, p. 171).
- 88.
Horowitz (1991, p. 175).
- 89.
Horowitz (1991, p. 175).
- 90.
Lijphart (2002, pp. 43–44).
- 91.
Lijphart (2002, pp. 43–44).
- 92.
Lijphart (2002, p. 44).
- 93.
Reilly (2001, p. 9).
- 94.
Reilly (2001, p. 10).
- 95.
- 96.
Reilly (2001, p. 10).
- 97.
Reilly (2001, p. 10).
- 98.
Horowitz (1991, p. 175).
- 99.
Horowitz (1985, p. 619).
- 100.
Reilly (2001, pp. 177–178).
- 101.
Fraenkel and Grofman (2004, p. 489).
- 102.
Fraenkel and Grofman (2006, p. 647).
- 103.
- 104.
Fraenkel and Grofman (2006, p. 648).
- 105.
Horowitz (2006, pp. 656–657).
- 106.
Horowitz (2006, pp. 660, 656).
- 107.
Horowitz (2006, p. 659).
- 108.
Horowitz (2006, p. 659).
- 109.
Horowitz (2006, p. 659).
- 110.
Horowitz (2006, p. 648).
- 111.
Fraenkel and Grofman (2006, p. 623).
- 112.
Reilly (2001, pp. 167–171).
References
Adam, Hussein M. “Formation and Recognition of New States: Somaliland in Contrast to Eritrea.” Review of African Political Economy. 59 (1994) 21–38.
Barry, Brian. “The Consociational Model and Its Dangers.” European Journal of Political Research. 3:4 (December, 1975a) 393–412.
Barry, Brian. “Review Article: Political Accommodation and Consociational Democracy.” British Journal of Political Science. 5:4 (1975b) 477–505.
Bogaards, Matthijs. “The Favourable Factors for Consociational Democracy: A Review.” European Journal of Political Research. 33 (1998) 475–496.
Boulle, L.J. Constitutional Reform and the Apartheid State: Legitimacy, Consociation, and Control in South Africa. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984.
Boynton, G.R. and W.H. Kwon. “An Analysis of Consociational Democracy.” Legislative Studies Quarterly. 3:1 (February, 1978) 11–26.
Butenschøn, Nils A. “Conflict Management in Plural Societies: The Consociational Democracy Formula.” Scandinavian Political Studies. 8:1–2 (June, 1985) 85–103.
Daalder, Hans. “The Consociational Democracy Theme.” World Politics. 26:4 (July, 1974) 604–621.
Fraenkel, Jon and Bernard Grofman. “A Neo-Downsian Model of the Alternative Vote as a Mechanism for Mitigating Ethnic Conflict in Plural Societies.” Public Choice. 121:3/4 (2004) 487–506.
Fraenkel, Jon and Bernard Grofman. “Does the Alternative Vote Foster Moderation in Ethnically Divided Societies?: The Case of Fiji.” Comparative Political Studies. 39:5 (June, 2006) 623–651.
Gabel, Matthew J. “The Endurance of Supranational Governance: A Consociational Interpretation of the European Union.” Comparative Politics. (July, 1998) 463–475.
Halpern, Sue M. “The Disorderly Universe of Consociational Democracy.” West European Politics. 9:2 (1986) 181–197.
Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California, 1985.
Horowitz, Donald L. A Democratic South Africa?: Constitutional Engineering in a Divided Society. Berkeley: University of California, 1991.
Horowitz, Donald L. “Response: Strategy Takes a Holiday: Fraenkel and Grofman on the Alternative Vote.” Comparative Political Studies. 39:5 (June, 2006) 652–662.
Hudson, Michael C. “The Problem of Authoritative Power in Lebanese Politics: Why Consociation Failed.” Lebanon: A History of Conflict and Consensus. Eds. Nadim Shehadi and Dana Haffar Mills. London: I.B. Tauris, 1988.
Kieve, Ronald A. “Pillars of Sand: A Marxist Critique of Consociational Government in the Netherlands.” Comparative Politics. (April, 1981) 313–337.
Knox, Colin. Emerging Consociation: Prospects for Power-Sharing in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland: Centre for Research in Public Policy and Management, at the University of Ulster, 1995.
Kotzé, Hennie. Federalism: The State of the Debate in South Africa. Stellenbosch: Center for International and Comparative Politics. http://www.unisa.ac.za/dept/press/politeia/142/hennw.html. Most recently consulted August 2001. No page numbers available on website. Also available in Politeia. 14:2 (1995).
Lijphart, Arend. Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.
Lijphart, Arend. “Consociation and Federation: Conceptual and Empirical Links.” Canadian Journal of Political Science. 12:3 (September, 1979) 499–515.
Lijphart, Arend. Power-Sharing in South Africa. Berkeley: Institute of International Affairs, 1985.
Lijphart, Arend. “From the Politics of Accommodation to Adversarial Politics in the Netherlands: A Reassessment.” Politics in the Netherlands: How Much Change. Eds. Hans Daalder and Galen A. Irwin. London: Frank Cass, 1989.
Lijphart, Arend. “Research Note: The Alternative Vote: A Realistic Alternative for South Africa?” Politikon. 18:2 (June, 1991) 91–101.
Lijphart, Arend. “Democratization and Constitutional Choices in Czecho-Slovakia, Hungary, and Poland, 1989–91.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 4:2 (1992) 207–223.
Lijphart, Arend. “Prospects for Power-Sharing in the New South Africa.” Election ’91: South Africa: The Campaign, Results, and Future Prospects. Ed. Andrew Reynolds. London: James Currey Press, 1994.
Lijphart, Arend. “Self-Determination Versus Pre-Determination of Ethnic Minorities in Power-Sharing Systems.” The Rights of Minority Cultures. Ed. Will Kymlicka. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Lijphart, Arend. “The Framework Document on Northern Ireland and the Theory of Power-Sharing.” Government and Opposition. 31:3 (Summer, 1996a) 267–274.
Lijphart, Arend. “The Puzzle of Indian Democracy: A Consociational Interpretation.” American Political Science Review 90:2 (June, 1996b) 258–268.
Lijphart, Arend. “Disproportionality Under Alternative Voting: The Crucial- and Puzzling- Case of the Australian Senate Elections, 1919–1946.” Acta Politica. 32:1 (Spring, 1997) 9–24.
Lijphart, Arend. “South African Democracy: Majoritarian or Consociational?” Democratization 5:4 (Winter, 1998) 144–50.
Lijphart, Arend. “The Wave of Power-Sharing Democracy.” The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy. Ed. Andrew Reynolds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Linz, Juan. “The Perils of Presidentialism.” Parliamentary Versus Presidential Government. Ed. Arend Lijphart. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Lustick, Ian. “Stability in Deeply Divided Societies: Consociation Versus Control.” World Politics. 31:3 (1979) 325–344.
MacDonald, Michael. “The Siren’s Song: The Political Logic of Power-Sharing in South Africa.” Journal of Southern African Studies. 18:4 (December, 1992) 709–725.
McRae, Kenneth. “Introduction.” Consociational Democracy: Political Accommodation in Segmented Societies. Ed. McRae, Kenneth. Toronto: McClelland, 1974.
O’Leary, Brendan. “Debating Consociational Politics: Normative and Explanatory Arguments.” From Power Sharing to Democracy: Post-conflict Institutions in Ethnically Divided Societies. Ed. Sid Noel. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University, 2005.
Reilly, Ben. Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Sartori, Giovanni. Parties and Party Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.
Steiner, Jürg. “Research Strategies Beyond Consociational Theory.” The Journal of Politics. 43:4 (November, 1981) 1241–1250.
Taylor, Rupert. “A Consociational Path to Peace in Northern Ireland and South Africa?” New Perspectives on the Northern Ireland Conflict. Ed. Adrian Guelke. Aldershot: Avebury, 1994. 161–174.
Van Schendelen, M.P.C.M. “The Views of Arend Lijphart and Collected Criticisms.” Acta Politica 19:1 (January, 1984) 19–55.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kelly, B.B. (2019). What Is Consociation?. In: Power-Sharing and Consociational Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14191-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14191-2_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-14190-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-14191-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)