Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The False Promise of Liberal Consociations

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract (may include machine translation)

It has become common to distinguish between two types of consociations. Liberal consociations, which leave open which groups will share power and enjoy autonomy, are generally considered “good”. In contrast, corporate consociations are viewed as “bad” because they institutionalize ethnic politics. This paper challenges these assumptions. It shows that the advantages of liberal consociations have been overstated and the downsides of corporate consociations have been exaggerated. Moreover, there is little liberal about liberal consociations. The paper recommends to go back to the earlier terminology of self-determination vs. pre-determination, to accept that consociational politics is group-based, and to do more systematic empirical research on the effects of different institutional arrangements.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-20
JournalChinese Political Science Review
DOIs
StatePublished - 17 Mar 2026

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
    SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Keywords

  • Civil war
  • Consociation
  • Democracy
  • Ethnic conflict
  • Federalism
  • Institutions
  • Liberalism
  • Power-sharing

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The False Promise of Liberal Consociations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this