Suchergebnisse

First Published in 2011. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

AbstractThis article tests the hypothesis that ethnic identities in divided societies lose their significance after the implementation of consociational power‐sharing arrangements. It analyses and compares the cases of Northern Ireland and Malaysia, as both have a substantially different experience of liberal consociationalism. In Northern Ireland, power sharing is strictly enforced through the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement of 1998, whilst in Malaysia it is exercised more informally within the Barisan Nasional coalition, which has governed the state since independence in 1957. Malaysia, therefore, has a considerably longer history of consociationalism than Northern Ireland. It is thought that if a mitigation of the salience of ethnic identities is taking place, ethnic political parties would become less prevalent. This article argues that these parties remain highly significant and, therefore, a shared identity is not being realized in either case. This conclusion does not, however, demonstrate a shortcoming of consociational theory but instead shows that managing conflict in divided societies is not the same as removing it altogether.

AbstractCross‐segmental parties are outliers in consociations dominated by ethnic parties. While they often receive comparatively limited electoral support, they have the ability to make representative politics work. Cross‐segmental parties can successfully represent cross‐communal interests and encourage governments to focus on non‐segmental issues by bringing their 'second policy dimension' to the attention of segmental parties and encouraging 'issue seepage'. To demonstrate this, we draw on evidence from these parties in cases including Northern Ireland, Belgium, Bosnia‐Herzegovina, Lebanon and South Tyrol, and argue that we need to look beyond election results to gauge their 'success'. We identify three key areas – electoral dynamics, interactions in legislatures and contribution to government – where cross‐segmental, not segmental, parties can make representation work in consociations. This is true not only in liberal consociations that (can) explicitly accommodate cross‐segmental interests in legislative and executive arrangements but also in corporate consociations where formal accommodation does not exist.

Political parties are afforded a key role in making consociational democracy work; however, parties that dis-identify with salient identities and appeal to voters across the ethno-political divide face barriers when interacting with voters and with other, segmental parties. Nevertheless, such cross-segmental parties often thrive and even ascend to power. Northern Ireland's cross-segmental parties – the Alliance Party, the Green Party, and People before Profit – have sought to traverse group-specific voter interests and set their agenda apart from that of segmental parties. For such parties to be considered 'coalitionable', they should outline their (potential) governing contribution to complement other political parties' agendas. Cross-segmental parties' participation in government makes them appear electable, but it is the focus on bipartisan concerns that consolidates their electoral success and ensures their political relevance. We focus on the evolution of Alliance's political agenda and fill a gap in the literature on the relevance of cross-segmental parties in consociations.