Cover; Half Title; Book Title; Copyright; Table of Contents; List of illustrations; Acknowledgements; List of abbreviations and acronyms; 1 Introduction; 1.1 Prologue; 1.2 Nepal, Myanmar and Sri Lanka; 1.3 The origins and evolution of federalism; 1.4 Blending accommodation and moderation; 1.5 Chapters summary; Notes; References; 2 Methodology and conceptual framework; 2.1 New institutionalism; 2.2 Path dependence and critical junctures; 2.3 The federalisation process; 2.4 Variables and conceptual framework; 2.5 Summary; Notes; References; 3 Federalism, accommodation and Asia.
Access options:
The following links lead to the full text from the respective local libraries:
AbstractHow do ethnically divided countries create inclusive and stable democratic institutions? Why do some kinds of federalism fail while others evolve? Scholars looking for answers to these kinds of questions have tended to focus on the West. Yet there are important lessons arising from the substantial democratic and federal reforms that have taken place in Asia over the last few decades. These reforms signal a new model of federal democracy in Asia, comprising multilevel ethnoterritorial federalism, mixed-majoritarianism and a party system that includes both ethnic and multi-ethnic parties. This model has emerged as a response to ethnic conflict and secession risks and reflects the high diversity of clustered communities and cross-cutting cleavages. Despite its overarching majoritarianism, the federal model has led to highly fragmented party systems and coalition governments, with positive implications for democratic stability. Together, these features go some way towards blending otherwise conflicting consociational and centripetal paradigms.
Myanmar is in an important phase of its political transition. The opportunity for substantive federal reform, which is central to peacebuilding and democratisation, is present and being progressed through parallel elite level forums. However, these elite negotiations have serious limitations, as they fail to reach out to citizens, and contribute to polarisation and the perpetuation of extreme views regarding federalism. To address the absence of public deliberation on federalism in Myanmar, we organised five deliberative events based on the Deliberative Polling® methodology. This paper discusses some of the key findings and demonstrates how they can contribute to federal constitutional reform in Myanmar. It shows that when debating fundamental issues relating to identity and national sovereignty, public deliberation has moderation effects even in conflict-ridden deeply divided societies. Indeed, questions that related to the institutions associated with identity and religion had the highest quality of deliberation, opinion change and moderation. These more moderate and considered deliberated perspectives are of great value for dealing with the polarisation issue that Myanmar faces and demonstrate the potential of deliberative democracy tools to supplement and moderate electoral democracy and elite-driven constitutional change processes.
"He, Breen and Allison-Reumann combine qualitative and quantitative research to compare the successes and failures of attempts at Federalism in Asian countries. Federalism is an increasingly common approach to improving governance and resolving ethnic conflict in Asia. However, Asian federalism faces three thorny problems. First, the ethnic federalism paradigm dominates political and intellectual life, rendering political compromise difficult and creating an obstacle to establishing or improving federalism in Asia. Second, religious fundamentalism and secular refusal to accommodate religious demands pose an existential threat to federal politics. Third, a majoritarian democracy is itself a threat to federalism in Asia, and the peace and stability that it is meant to underpin. Through a truly comparative analysis, He, Breen and Allison-Reumann investigate the potential for a hybrid-ethnic approach, religious moderation and deliberative democracy to overcome these challenges. They analyse cases from across Asia - both successes and failures. These include countries encompassing the first generation of federalism in Asia - India, Malaysia and Pakistan - and challenges faced by the new, emerging and aspiring federal states, namely Nepal, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka. They demonstrate how federalism can be achieved through compromise and a continual renegotiation of its underpinning values. A vital resource for scholars of political systems in Asia, and of federalism more broadly"--
"He, Breen and Allison-Reumann combine qualitative and quantitative research to compare the successes and failures of attempts at Federalism in Asian countries. Federalism is an increasingly common approach to improving governance and resolving ethnic conflict in Asia. However, Asian federalism faces three thorny problems. First, the ethnic federalism paradigm dominates political and intellectual life, rendering political compromise difficult and creating an obstacle to establishing or improving federalism in Asia. Second, religious fundamentalism and secular refusal to accommodate religious demands pose an existential threat to federal politics. Third, a majoritarian democracy is itself a threat to federalism in Asia, and the peace and stability that it is meant to underpin. Through a truly comparative analysis, He, Breen and Allison-Reumann investigate the potential for a hybrid-ethnic approach, religious moderation and deliberative democracy to overcome these challenges. They analyse cases from across Asia - both successes and failures. These include countries encompassing the first generation of federalism in Asia - India, Malaysia and Pakistan - and challenges faced by the new, emerging and aspiring federal states, namely Nepal, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka. They demonstrate how federalism can be achieved through compromise and a continual renegotiation of its underpinning values. A vital resource for scholars of political systems in Asia, and of federalism more broadly"--
