Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethnic Polarization and Human Development: The Conditional Effects of Minority Language Recognition

  • Published:
Studies in Comparative International Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The literature suggests ethnic diversity has a negative effect on development. Yet, we also know that government policies—e.g., recognizing multiple languages in minority-sizable areas—can attenuate these effects. In this paper, we ask: What are the socioeconomic implications of minority language recognition? We leverage a legal stipulation in Romania as a quasi-experiment: Minority languages are recognized as official in areas where the minority constitutes more than 20% of the population. We argue the recognition of minority languages builds social trust and facilitates efficiency in economic exchanges—mollifying the otherwise detrimental consequences of diversity. Using data at the municipality level, we find that in areas where only Romanian is recognized, ethnic diversity has a negative effect on development—a result consistent with the literature. This effect, however, is absent in areas where a minority language is recognized. The implications suggest that lowering the threshold for language recognition could promote even further development.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. While the territoriality principle is about the de jure recognition of minority languages, there are de facto challenges when it comes to implementation. The first has to do with time. While recognition is enshrined per the Romanian Constitution (Article 120), formal implementation conditions and processes are enumerated in different laws. One of these laws includes the 2001 Law of Local Public Administration—which specifically notes the 20% threshold for recognition. Localities were required to implement these linguistic reforms shortly after the adoption of the law (November 27, 2001)— before the 2001 census results were made public. Thus, recognition decisions were made according to the 1992 census. And until recently (2019 Emergency Government Ordinance, Number 57), the laws did not specify any procedures for updating the list of the municipalities above the 20% threshold. The second challenge is finances. While the European Charter on Regional and Minority Languages stipulates that national governments should bear the costs of language recognition at local levels, this is far from reality in Romania (Horváth and Toró 2018: 208). First, per Governmental Decision (1206/2001, Article 17), it is the local budgets that support minority language use (Toró 2020). Second, since implementation costs can be formidable (e.g., the maintenance of bilingual personnel), minority language recognition can prove to be a sizeable financial investment for some Romanian municipalities (Horváth et al. 2021).

  2. All maps are presented with scales determined by Jenks natural breaks optimization—a method that seeks to minimize variance within classes but maximize it between them.

  3. For a comparison of basic types of diversity indices, see Németh et al. 2020. We associate fractionalization with competing rather than cooperating bottom-up initiatives.

  4. Fragmentation carries the notion of division created under external pressure—managed from above—compelled rather than voluntary.

  5. The true EPI values are likely to be lower (although not by much) than the calculated ones since there may be under-counting of the Roma population. For the census, identification is based on self-reporting. As such, Romas may choose not to identify as such to avoid stigma (Csata et al. 2021a).

  6. Note that in the Transylvanian case, ethnic self-classification and language use coincide to a very large extent (Veres 2011). In fact, language is a very strong—if not outright an inseparable—element of ethnic identity among Hungarians.

  7. https://data.gov.ro/dataset/registrul-national-ong (Accessed 16 July 2020).

  8. http://www.2016bec.ro/rezultate-finale-10-06-2016/index.html (Accessed 16 July 2020).

  9. A regression discontinuity design was not feasible due to a low number of observations around the cutoff point, raising concerns about sufficient power to detect effects.

  10. See https://atlo.team/hungarianmoney-en/

References

  • Alesina A, Baqir R, Easterly W. Public Goods and Ethnic Divisions. Q J Econ. 1999;114(4):1243–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Devleeschauwer A, Easterly W, Kurlat S, Wacziarg R. Fractionalisation. J Econ Growth. 2003;8(2):155–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrén D. Romanians, Hungarians and their wages, in transition, in Romania. Econ Model. 2012;29(6):2673–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcand J-L. Development economics and language: the earnest search for a mirage? Int J Sociol Lang. 1996;121:119–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcand JL, Grin F. Language in economic development: Is english special and is linguistic fragmentation bad? Engl Dev Policy Pedag Global. 2013;17:243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin K, Huber JD. Economic versus cultural differences: forms of ethnic diversity and public goods provision. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2010:644–62.

  • Barany Z. Ethnic mobilization and the state: the Roma in Eastern Europe. Ethn Racial Stud. 1998;21(2):308–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedek J. The emergence of new regions in transition Romania. In: Scott JW, editor. De-coding New Regionalism: Ashgate; 2009. p. 233–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedek J, Török I, Máthé C. Dimensiunea regională a societăţii, diversitatea etno-culturală şi organizarea administrativ-teritorială în România. Cercetarea Minorităților Naționale din România. 2013;51.

  • Benedek J, Török I, Máthé C. Evidence-based designation of development regions in Romania. Reg Stat. 2018;8(1):120–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bormann N-C, Cederman L-E, Vogt M. Language, religion, and ethnic civil war. J Confl Resolut. 2017;61(4):744–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bracic A. Breaking the exclusion cycle: how to promote cooperation between majority and minority ethnic groups. New York: Oxford University Press; 2020.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker R, Feischmidt M, Fox J, Grancea L. Nationalist politics and everyday ethnicity in a Transylvanian town: Princeton University Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandra K. Why ethnic parties succeed: Patronage and ethnic head counts in India: Cambridge University Press; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chriost DMG. Language, identity and conflict: a comparative study of language in ethnic conflict in Europe and Eurasia: Routledge; 2004.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Collier P. Implications of ethnic diversity. Econ Policy. 2001;16(32):128–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csata Z. Az erdélyi magyar tanulók iskolai teljesítményének meghatározói a TIMSS vizsgálatok alapján. Kisebbségkutatás. 2014;23(4):126–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csata Z. Economy and Ethnicity in Transylvania. In: Kiss T, Székely IG, Toró T, Bárdi N, Horváth, editors. Unequal accommodation of minority rights. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan; 2018. p. 345–79.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Csata Z, Marácz LK. Prospects on Hungarian as a regional official language and Szeklerland’s Territorial Autonomy in Romania. Intl J Minor Group Rights. 2016;24(1):1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csata Z. Munkaerőpiaci egyenlőtlenségek Romániában, etnikai metszetben. Erdélyi Társadalom. 2017;15(1):81–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csata Z, Hlatky R, Liu AH. How to head count ethnic minorities: validity of census surveys versus other identification strategies. East Eur Polit. 2021a;37(3):572–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csata Z, Hlatky R, Liu AH, Young AP. The economic effects of the territoriality principle: evidence from Transylvania, Romania: Language Problems and Language Planning; 2021b.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Csepeli G, Örkény A, Székelyi M. Nemzetek egymás tükrében: interetnikus viszonyok a Kárpát-medencében. Balassi Kiadó. 2002.

  • Csergő Z. Talk of the nation: Language and conflict in Romania and Slovakia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press; 2007.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • De Schutter H. The linguistic territoriality principle—A critique. J Appl Philos. 2008;25(2):105–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterly W, Levine R. Africa’s growth tragedy: policies and ethnic divisions. Q J Econ. 1997;112(4):1203–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fearon JD. Ethnic and cultural diversity by country. J Econ Growth. 2003;8(2):195–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishman JA. Some contrasts between linguistically homogeneous and linguistically heterogeneous polities. Sociol Inq. 1966;36(2):146–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburgh V, Weber S. How many languages do we need?: The economics of linguistic diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2011.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gören E. How ethnic diversity affects economic growth. World Dev. 2014;59:275–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habyarimana J, Humphreys M, Posner DN, Weinstein J. Coethnicity: diversity and the dilemmas of collective action. New York: Russell Sage; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horváth I. A romániai nyelvpolitikák értékelése. Regio. 2009;20(1):3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horváth I, Toró T. Language use, language policy, and language rights. In Unequal Accommodation of Minority Rights. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan; 2018. p. 167–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horváth I, Csata Z, Székely IG. Utilizarea limbii materne la nivelul unităților administrative locale. Estimare costuri. Studii de atelier. Cercetarea minorităţilor naţionale din România, Nr. 68: Cluj-Napoca, Institutul Pentru Studierea Problemelor Minorităţilor Naţionale; 2021. p. 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu Y, Liu AH. The effects of foreign language proficiency on public attitudes. J East Asian Stud. 2020;20(1):1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ionescu-Heroiu M, Burduja S, Sandu D. Competitive cities: Reshaping the economic geography of Romania: Report. Bucharest; 2013.

  • Keller Alant, A 2020. “Living like in Hungary: orban bankrolling romania ‘ethnic parallelism’.’” Balkan Insight (January 30).

  • Kiss T. Támpontok az erdélyi etnikai rétegződési rendszer vizsgálatához II. Pro Minor. 2010;2:3–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiss T. Etnikai rétegződési rendszer Erdélyben és Romániában. A magyarok társadalmi pozíciói 1. REGIO. 2014;22(2):187–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontra M. “Don’t speak Hungarian in public!” A documentation and analysis of folk linguistic rights. In: Kontra MS, Phillipson R, Skutnabb-Kangas T, Várady T, editors. Language, a right and a resource: Approaches to linguistics human rights. Budapest and New York: Central European University Press; 1999. p. xi346p.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kovács E. Direct and indirect political remittances of the transnational engagement of Hungarian kin-minorities and diaspora communities. J Ethn Migr Stud. 2020;46(6):1146–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laitin DD, Ramachandran R. Language policy and human development. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2016;110(3):457–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Amy H., Kirkpatrick Andrew B., Beaudette Donald M. Linguistic competition and education spending in Spain 1992–2008. The Social Science Journal. 2014;51(1):139–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2013.08.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu AH. Standardizing diversity: the political economy of language regimes. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 2015.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Liu AH, Baird V. Linguistic recognition as a source of confidence in the justice system. Comp Polit Stud. 2012;45(10):1203–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu AH, Pizzi E. Language of economic growth: a new measure of linguistic heterogeneity. Br J Polit Sci. 2018;48(4):953–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu AH, Ricks J. Ethnicity and politics in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2022.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Liu AH, Brown DS, Dunn MH. Minority language recognition and trust: evidence from twenty-five democracies. Taiwan J Democracy. 2015;11(2):113–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu AH, Shair-Rosenfield S, Vance LR, Csata Z. Linguistic origins of gender equality and women’s rights. Gend Soc. 2018;32(1):82–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livezeanu I. Cultural politics in Greater Romania: regionalism, nation building & ethnic struggle, 1918-1930: Cornell University Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse P, Kempen RV. Globalizing cities: a new spatial order? Oxford: Blackwell; 2000.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marquardt KL. Identity, social mobility, and ethnic mobilization: language and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Comp Polit Stud. 2018;51(7):831–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros M, von Schoultz Å, Wass H. Language matters? Antecedents and political consequences of support for bilingualism in Canada and Finland: Comparative European Politics; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miguel E, Gugerty MK. Ethnic diversity, social sanctions, and public goods in Kenya. J Public Econ. 2005;89(11-12):325–2368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishler W, Rose R. Trust, distrust, and skepticism: popular evaluations of civil and political institutions in post-communist societies. J Polit. 1997;59(2):418–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montalvo JG, Reynal-Querol M. Ethnic diversity and economic development. J Dev Econ. 2005;76(2):293–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moormann-Kimáková B. Language-related conflicts in multinational and multiethnic settings: success and failure of language regimes: Springer; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musterd S, Ostendorf WJ. Urban segregation and the welfare state: inequality and exclusion in western cities. London: Routledge; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Németh Á, Sümeghy D, Trócsányi A, Pirisi G. Competing diversity índices and attitudes toward cultural pluralism in Europe. Equal Divers Inclus Int J. 2020.

  • Pop D. Autorităţile administrative şi serviciile publice. In: Călușer M, editor. Carta europeană a limbilor regionale sau minoritare în România. Între norme și practici. Cluj-Napoca: Editura CRDE; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner DN. Measuring ethnic fractionalization in Africa. Am J Polit Sci. 2004a;48(4):849–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner DN. The political salience of cultural difference: why Chewas and Tumbukas are allies in Zambia and adversaries in Malawi. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2004b:529–45.

  • Putnam RD. E. pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century. Scand Polit Stud. 2007;30(2):137–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabushka A, Shepsle K. Politics in plural societies. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricks JI. The effect of language on political appeal: results from a survey experiment in Thailand. Polit Behav. 2018.

  • Ringe N. The language(s) of politics: multilingual policy-making in the European Union. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press; 2022.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Salat L, Novák CZ. Ethnicity, nationalism, and the minority regime. In: Stan L, Vancea D, editors. Post-communist Romania at twenty-fve: Linking past, present, and future. Lanham: Lexington Books; 2015. p. 63–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandu D. Dezvoltare și sărăcie în satele României. Sociologie românească. 1999;8(4):117–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandu D. Social disparities in the regional development and policies of Romania. Int Rev Soc Res. 2011;1(1):1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selway JS. The measurement of cross-cutting cleavages and other multidimensional cleavage structures. Polit Anal. 2011;19(1):48–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stroschein S. Ethnic struggle, coexistence. In: and democratization in eastern Europe. Cambridge studies in contentious politics. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toró T. Detached implementation: discourse and practice in minority language use in Romania. Lang Policy. 2020;19(1):5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Parijs P. Linguistic justice for europe and for the world: Oxford University Press on Demand; 2011.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Verdery K. Transylvanian villagers: three centuries of political, economic, and ethnic change: Univ of California Press; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veres V. Nemzeti identitás Erdélyben – szociológiai olvasatban. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincze E. Faces and causes of roma marginalization experiences from Romania. In: Szalai J, Zentai V, editors. Faces and causes of roma marginalization in local contexts. Budapest: Center for Policy Studies; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincze E, Petrovici N, Raț C, Picker G, editors. Racialized Labour in Romania: spaces of marginality at the periphery of global capitalism: Springer; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickström BA. The percentage rule for minority language rights: Inadequate or discriminatory. Język Komunikacja Informacja. 2019;14:72–84.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sociology and Social Work, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

    Zsombor Csata

  2. Centre for Social Sciences, Institute for Minority Studies, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary

    Zsombor Csata

  3. Political Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA

    Roman Hlatky

  4. Government, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Amy H. Liu

Authors
  1. Zsombor Csata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roman Hlatky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amy H. Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy H. Liu.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Csata, Z., Hlatky, R. & Liu, A.H. Ethnic Polarization and Human Development: The Conditional Effects of Minority Language Recognition. St Comp Int Dev 58, 79–102 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-022-09362-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-022-09362-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation