Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparative Framework of State Formation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover State-Formation and Democratization

Part of the book series: Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century ((CDC))

  • 295 Accesses

Abstract

Denk and Lehtinen present a theoretical model of state formation, which assumes that state formation is a sequence of events that have five phases: demand phase, response phase, reaction phase, decisive phase, and implementation phase. The chapter argues that cases of state formation may have different qualities in these phases and presents a framework with typologies that specify various modes of the phases. The authors use the framework to classify 132 cases of state formation, which describe the phases of state formation since 1946. The empirical analyses show that the cases have different modes in the phases, which indicates that the cases have become independent states after various processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almond, G. A., & Powell, G. B. (1966). Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. A. (1960). Introduction: A Functional Approach to Comparative Politics. In G. A. Almond & J. S. Coleman (Eds.), The Politics of Developing Areas (pp. 16–50). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, A. S., & Muller, T. C. (2011). Political Handbook of the World 2011. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, A. S., Muller, T. C., & Overstreet, W. R. (2007). Political Handbook of the World 2007. Washington: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, S., Allerbeck, K. R., Farah, B. G., Heunks, F. J., Inglehart, R. F., Jennings, M. K., et al. (1979). Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder, L., Coleman, J. S., LaPalombara, J., Pye, L. W., Verba, S., & Weiner, M. (1971). Crises and Sequences in Political Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bookman, M. Z. (1992). The Economics of Secession. New York: St. Martins Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, A. (1991). Secession: The Morality of Political Divorce from Fort Sumter to Lithuania and Quebec. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchheit, L. C. (1978). Secession: The Legitimacy of Self-Determination. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castellino, J. (2011). The UN Principle of Self-Determination and Secession from Decolonized States: Katanga and Biafra. In A. Pavaković & P. Radan (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Secession (pp. 117–130). Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coggins, B. (2014). Power Politics and State Formation in the Twentieth Century: The Dynamics of Recognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, K. G. (2014). Inside the Politics of Self-Determination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, K. G., Dahl, M., & Frugé, A. (2017). Strategies of Resistance: Diversification and Diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 61(3), 591–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, R. (2013). Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derbyshire, J. D., & Derbyshire, I. (1999). Political Systems of the World. Vol 1 & 2. Oxford: Helicon Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. (1965a). A System Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. (1965b). A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabry, M. (2010). Recognizing States: International Society & the Establishment of New States Since 1976. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fabry, M. (2011). International Involvement in Secessionist Conflict: From the 16th Century to the Present. In A. Pavaković & P. Radan (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Secession (pp. 251–266). Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortna, V. P., & Huang, R. (2012). Democratization After Civil War: A Brush-Clearing Exercise. International Studies Quarterly, 56(4), 801–808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, B. A., Hensel, P. R., & Macaulay, C. (2017). The Issue Correlates of War Territorial Claims Data, 1816–2001. Journal of Peace Research, 54(1), 99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2004). State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2011). The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution. London: Profile Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2014). Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, G. (2002). Democracy and Post-Communism: Political Change in the Post-Communist World. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, R. D. (2016). Age of Secession: The International and Domestic Determinants of State Birth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gurr, T. R. (1993). Minorities at Risk: A Global View of Ethnopolitical Conflicts. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurr, T. R. (2000). People Versus States: Minorities at Risk in the New Century. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurses, M., & Mason, T. D. (2008). Democracy Out of Anarchy: The Prospects for Post-Civil-War Democracy. Social Science Quarterly, 89(2), 315–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, B. (2002). Referenda as a Solution to the National-Identity/Boundary Question: An Empirical Critique of the Theoretical Literature. Alternatives, 27(1), 67–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hechter, M. (1992). The Dynamics of Secession. Acta Sociologica, 35(2), 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, S. P. (1968). Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innes, A. (2001). Czechoslovakia: The Short Goodbye. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2016). The State: Past, Present, Future. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, M. (2010). Post-Civil War Democratization: Promotion of Democracy in Post-Civil War States, 1946–2005. Democratization, 17(5), 826–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, M. (2013). Inclusive Institutions and Stability of Transition Toward Democracy in Post-Civil War States. Democratization, 20(4), 743–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karl, T. L. (1990). Dilemmas of Democratization in Latin America. Comparative Politics, 23(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karl, T. L., & Schmitter, P. C. (1991). Modes of Transition in Latin America, Southern and Eastern Europe. International Social Science Journal, 128(2), 269–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoke, D. (1990). Political Networks: The Structural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kubo, K. (2011). Secession and Ethic Conflict. In A. Pavaković & P. Radan (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Secession (pp. 207–225). Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, M. (2009). Despotism and Development: British Colonialism and State Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leff, C. S. (1996). The Czech and Slovak Republics: Nation Versus State. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linz, J. J., & Stepan, A. (1996). Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation. Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malešević, S., & Dochartaigh, N. O. (2011). Secession and Political Violence. In A. Pavaković & P. Radan (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Secession (pp. 227–250). Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, A. (1977). Protest and Political Consciousness. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munck, G. L., & Leffner, C. S. (1997). Modes of Transition and Democratization: South America and Eastern Europe in Comparative Perspective. Comparative Politics, 29(3), 343–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Navaratna-Bandara, A. M. (1995). The Management of Ethic Secessionist Conflict: The Big Neighbour Syndrome. Aldershot: Dartmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavković, A. (2007). Creating New States: Theory and Practice of Secession. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2016). Comparative Governance: Rediscovering the Functional Dimension of Governing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Poggi, G. (1978). The Development of the Modern State. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qvortrup, M. (2014). Referendums on Independence, 1860–2011. Political Quarterly, 85(1), 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sisson, R., & Rose, L. E. (1990). War and Secession: Pakistan, India, and The Creation of Bangladesh. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorens, J. (2012). Secessionism: Identity, Interest, and Strategy. Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2000). Czecho/Slovaia: Ethnic Conflict, Constitutional Fissure, Negotiated Breakup. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturman, K. (2011). Eritrea: A Belated Post-colonial Secession. In A. Pavković & P. Radan (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Secession (pp. 497–499). Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suksi, M. (1993). Bringing in the People: A Comparison of Constitutional Forms and Practices of the Referendum. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teorell, J., Torcal, M., & Montero, J. R. (2007). Political Participation: Mapping the Terrain. In J. W. van Deth, J. R. Montero, & A. Westholm (Eds.), Citizenship and Involvement in European Democracies: A Comparative Analysis (pp. 334–354). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (1992). Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990–1992. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Deth, J. W. (2014). A Conceptual Map of Political Participation. Acta Politica, 49(3), 349–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, J. R. (1981). Secession: A Comparative Analytical Framework. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 14(1), 107–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. A. (1994). How Do Peaceful Secessions Happens? Canadian Journal of Political Science, 27(4), 774–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden

    Thomas Denk

  2. The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, Stockholm, Sweden

    Sarah Lehtinen

Authors
  1. Thomas Denk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah Lehtinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Denk .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Denk, T., Lehtinen, S. (2019). A Comparative Framework of State Formation. In: State-Formation and Democratization. Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91749-8_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation