Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Power-Sharing and Consociational Theory pp 19–51Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

What Is Consociation?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 426 Accesses

Abstract

Lijphart’s commitment to bringing stability to plural societies has led him to write extensively about consociation in a body of literature published over more than four decades. Scientifically sound quantitative analysis of his theory of consociation requires systematic identification of its elements. This chapter demonstrates that his central claim is that “consociation promotes stability in plural societies.” It also shows that he has consistently described consociation as consisting of four core components: grand coalition, segmental autonomy, proportionality, and minority veto power. The exact meanings of these terms as they are used by Lijphart are precisely described. Consideration of common criticisms of Lijphart’s work in this area emphasizes that quantitative operationalization of the theory of consociationalism and the system’s components is a valuable contribution in itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   84.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Lijphart (1998, p. 144).

  2. 2.

    O’Leary (2005, p. 4).

  3. 3.

    O’Leary (2005, p. 4).

  4. 4.

    O’Leary (2005, pp. 5–6).

  5. 5.

    O’Leary (2005, p. 7).

  6. 6.

    & These sources, as well as those mentioned in footnote 50, are discussed at length on the website.

  7. 7.

    Academic contributions by Karl Renner , W. Arthur Lewis , Lorwin , and Lehmbruch provide further evidence that Lijphart’s core concept is one that makes intuitive sense to many people, who came to agree with it from varied international perspectives. It emphasizes that many of consociation’s core components have been consistently associated with one another, by Lijphart and other scholars who appear to have worked independently of him.

  8. 8.

    Bogaards (1998, p. 499).

  9. 9.

    Lijphart (1991, p. 499).

  10. 10.

    Van Schendelen (1984, pp. 30, 44) and Taylor (1994, pp. 167–169).

  11. 11.

    Lijphart (1989, p. 142).

  12. 12.

    Taylor (1994, p. 167).

  13. 13.

    Lijphart (1985, p. 115) and Barry (1975b, p. 489).

  14. 14.

    Lijphart (1998, p. 149).

  15. 15.

    Lijphart (1985, p. 503).

  16. 16.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 25).

  17. 17.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 1).

  18. 18.

    Boulle (1984, p. 45).

  19. 19.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 25).

  20. 20.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 125).

  21. 21.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 148).

  22. 22.

    Lijphart (1977, pp. 151, 152).

  23. 23.

    Lijphart (1996a, pp. 258–261).

  24. 24.

    Lijphart (1996b, p. 261).

  25. 25.

    Lijphart (1977, pp. 25, 31).

  26. 26.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 31).

  27. 27.

    Lijphart (1996b, pp. 259–260).

  28. 28.

    Lijphart (1989, p. 141).

  29. 29.

    Linz (1992, p. 124).

  30. 30.

    Lijphart (1992, p. 217).

  31. 31.

    Lijphart (1991, p. 494).

  32. 32.

    Kieve (1981, p. 315).

  33. 33.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 36).

  34. 34.

    Knox (1995, p. 4).

  35. 35.

    McRae (1974, p. 5).

  36. 36.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 41).

  37. 37.

    Halpern (1986, p. 191).

  38. 38.

    Lijphart (1989, p. 141).

  39. 39.

    Gabel (1998, p. 463).

  40. 40.

    Steiner (1981, p. 1241).

  41. 41.

    Steiner (1981, p. 1242).

  42. 42.

    Halpern (1986, p. 192).

  43. 43.

    Lijphart (1991, p. 499).

  44. 44.

    Lijphart (1998, p. 144).

  45. 45.

    Lijphart (1995, p. 281).

  46. 46.

    Lijphart (1995, p. 281).

  47. 47.

    Lijphart (1995, p. 281).

  48. 48.

    Lijphart (1995, p. 281).

  49. 49.

    Lijphart (1995, p. 282).

  50. 50.

    Lijphart (1995, p. 282).

  51. 51.

    Lijphart (1995, p. 282).

  52. 52.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 25).

  53. 53.

    (Lijphart 1977, p. 25).

  54. 54.

    Halpern (1986, p. 191) pointed out that subcultures would not be represented proportionally, unless political parties perfectly corresponded to subcultures’ boundaries.

  55. 55.

    Lijphart (1996b, p. 261).

  56. 56.

    Lijphart (1989, p. 141).

  57. 57.

    Lijphart (1991, p. 507).

  58. 58.

    Lijphart (1991, p. 93; 1997, p. 9).

  59. 59.

    Lijphart (1977, pp. 36–37).

  60. 60.

    Kotzé (2001) and Gabel (1998, p. 465).

  61. 61.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 37).

  62. 62.

    Lijphart (1991, p. 495).

  63. 63.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 38).

  64. 64.

    Lijphart (1994, p. 223; 1996a, p. 271).

  65. 65.

    MacDonald (1992, p. 713) and Adam (1994, p. 32).

  66. 66.

    Hudson (1988, p. 227).

  67. 67.

    The italics shown here did not exist in the original text.

  68. 68.

    Lijphart (1979, p. 501).

  69. 69.

    Barry (1975b, p. 129).

  70. 70.

    Lustick (1979, p. 330).

  71. 71.

    Daalder (1974, pp. 615–618).

  72. 72.

    Barry (1975b, p. 487).

  73. 73.

    Boynton and Kwon (1978, pp. 11, 24).

  74. 74.

    Boynton and Kwon (1978, pp. 21, 25).

  75. 75.

    Boynton and Kwon (1978, p. 25).

  76. 76.

    Barry (1975b, p. 500).

  77. 77.

    Van Schendelen (1984, p. 32).

  78. 78.

    Lijphart (2002, p. 41).

  79. 79.

    Lijphart (2002, p. 41).

  80. 80.

    Lijphart (2002, p. 41).

  81. 81.

    Barry (1975a, p. 396) and Butenschøn (1985, p. 99).

  82. 82.

    Lijphart (2002, p. 44).

  83. 83.

    Lijphart (1977, pp. 53, 170, 165; 2002, p. 44).

  84. 84.

    Lijphart (1977, p. 165).

  85. 85.

    Horowitz (1985, p. 573).

  86. 86.

    Horowitz (1985, p. 575).

  87. 87.

    Horowitz (1991, p. 171).

  88. 88.

    Horowitz (1991, p. 175).

  89. 89.

    Horowitz (1991, p. 175).

  90. 90.

    Lijphart (2002, pp. 43–44).

  91. 91.

    Lijphart (2002, pp. 43–44).

  92. 92.

    Lijphart (2002, p. 44).

  93. 93.

    Reilly (2001, p. 9).

  94. 94.

    Reilly (2001, p. 10).

  95. 95.

    Sartori (1976) and Reilly (2001, p. 10).

  96. 96.

    Reilly (2001, p. 10).

  97. 97.

    Reilly (2001, p. 10).

  98. 98.

    Horowitz (1991, p. 175).

  99. 99.

    Horowitz (1985, p. 619).

  100. 100.

    Reilly (2001, pp. 177–178).

  101. 101.

    Fraenkel and Grofman (2004, p. 489).

  102. 102.

    Fraenkel and Grofman (2006, p. 647).

  103. 103.

    Fraenkel and Grofman (2004, p. 502; 2006, p. 623).

  104. 104.

    Fraenkel and Grofman (2006, p. 648).

  105. 105.

    Horowitz (2006, pp. 656–657).

  106. 106.

    Horowitz (2006, pp. 660, 656).

  107. 107.

    Horowitz (2006, p. 659).

  108. 108.

    Horowitz (2006, p. 659).

  109. 109.

    Horowitz (2006, p. 659).

  110. 110.

    Horowitz (2006, p. 648).

  111. 111.

    Fraenkel and Grofman (2006, p. 623).

  112. 112.

    Reilly (2001, pp. 167–171).

References

  • Adam, Hussein M. “Formation and Recognition of New States: Somaliland in Contrast to Eritrea.” Review of African Political Economy. 59 (1994) 21–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, Brian. “The Consociational Model and Its Dangers.” European Journal of Political Research. 3:4 (December, 1975a) 393–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, Brian. “Review Article: Political Accommodation and Consociational Democracy.” British Journal of Political Science. 5:4 (1975b) 477–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogaards, Matthijs. “The Favourable Factors for Consociational Democracy: A Review.” European Journal of Political Research. 33 (1998) 475–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulle, L.J. Constitutional Reform and the Apartheid State: Legitimacy, Consociation, and Control in South Africa. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boynton, G.R. and W.H. Kwon. “An Analysis of Consociational Democracy.” Legislative Studies Quarterly. 3:1 (February, 1978) 11–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butenschøn, Nils A. “Conflict Management in Plural Societies: The Consociational Democracy Formula.” Scandinavian Political Studies. 8:1–2 (June, 1985) 85–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daalder, Hans. “The Consociational Democracy Theme.” World Politics. 26:4 (July, 1974) 604–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraenkel, Jon and Bernard Grofman. “A Neo-Downsian Model of the Alternative Vote as a Mechanism for Mitigating Ethnic Conflict in Plural Societies.” Public Choice. 121:3/4 (2004) 487–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraenkel, Jon and Bernard Grofman. “Does the Alternative Vote Foster Moderation in Ethnically Divided Societies?: The Case of Fiji.” Comparative Political Studies. 39:5 (June, 2006) 623–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabel, Matthew J. “The Endurance of Supranational Governance: A Consociational Interpretation of the European Union.” Comparative Politics. (July, 1998) 463–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, Sue M. “The Disorderly Universe of Consociational Democracy.” West European Politics. 9:2 (1986) 181–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, Donald L. A Democratic South Africa?: Constitutional Engineering in a Divided Society. Berkeley: University of California, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, Donald L. “Response: Strategy Takes a Holiday: Fraenkel and Grofman on the Alternative Vote.” Comparative Political Studies. 39:5 (June, 2006) 652–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, Michael C. “The Problem of Authoritative Power in Lebanese Politics: Why Consociation Failed.” Lebanon: A History of Conflict and Consensus. Eds. Nadim Shehadi and Dana Haffar Mills. London: I.B. Tauris, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieve, Ronald A. “Pillars of Sand: A Marxist Critique of Consociational Government in the Netherlands.” Comparative Politics. (April, 1981) 313–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knox, Colin. Emerging Consociation: Prospects for Power-Sharing in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland: Centre for Research in Public Policy and Management, at the University of Ulster, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotzé, Hennie. Federalism: The State of the Debate in South Africa. Stellenbosch: Center for International and Comparative Politics. http://www.unisa.ac.za/dept/press/politeia/142/hennw.html. Most recently consulted August 2001. No page numbers available on website. Also available in Politeia. 14:2 (1995).

  • Lijphart, Arend. Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “Consociation and Federation: Conceptual and Empirical Links.” Canadian Journal of Political Science. 12:3 (September, 1979) 499–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. Power-Sharing in South Africa. Berkeley: Institute of International Affairs, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “From the Politics of Accommodation to Adversarial Politics in the Netherlands: A Reassessment.” Politics in the Netherlands: How Much Change. Eds. Hans Daalder and Galen A. Irwin. London: Frank Cass, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “Research Note: The Alternative Vote: A Realistic Alternative for South Africa?” Politikon. 18:2 (June, 1991) 91–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “Democratization and Constitutional Choices in Czecho-Slovakia, Hungary, and Poland, 1989–91.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 4:2 (1992) 207–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “Prospects for Power-Sharing in the New South Africa.” Election ’91: South Africa: The Campaign, Results, and Future Prospects. Ed. Andrew Reynolds. London: James Currey Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “Self-Determination Versus Pre-Determination of Ethnic Minorities in Power-Sharing Systems.” The Rights of Minority Cultures. Ed. Will Kymlicka. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “The Framework Document on Northern Ireland and the Theory of Power-Sharing.” Government and Opposition. 31:3 (Summer, 1996a) 267–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “The Puzzle of Indian Democracy: A Consociational Interpretation.” American Political Science Review 90:2 (June, 1996b) 258–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “Disproportionality Under Alternative Voting: The Crucial- and Puzzling- Case of the Australian Senate Elections, 1919–1946.” Acta Politica. 32:1 (Spring, 1997) 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “South African Democracy: Majoritarian or Consociational?” Democratization 5:4 (Winter, 1998) 144–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. “The Wave of Power-Sharing Democracy.” The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy. Ed. Andrew Reynolds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linz, Juan. “The Perils of Presidentialism.” Parliamentary Versus Presidential Government. Ed. Arend Lijphart. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lustick, Ian. “Stability in Deeply Divided Societies: Consociation Versus Control.” World Politics. 31:3 (1979) 325–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, Michael. “The Siren’s Song: The Political Logic of Power-Sharing in South Africa.” Journal of Southern African Studies. 18:4 (December, 1992) 709–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • McRae, Kenneth. “Introduction.” Consociational Democracy: Political Accommodation in Segmented Societies. Ed. McRae, Kenneth. Toronto: McClelland, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, Brendan. “Debating Consociational Politics: Normative and Explanatory Arguments.” From Power Sharing to Democracy: Post-conflict Institutions in Ethnically Divided Societies. Ed. Sid Noel. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, Ben. Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, Giovanni. Parties and Party Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, Jürg. “Research Strategies Beyond Consociational Theory.” The Journal of Politics. 43:4 (November, 1981) 1241–1250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Rupert. “A Consociational Path to Peace in Northern Ireland and South Africa?” New Perspectives on the Northern Ireland Conflict. Ed. Adrian Guelke. Aldershot: Avebury, 1994. 161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Schendelen, M.P.C.M. “The Views of Arend Lijphart and Collected Criticisms.” Acta Politica 19:1 (January, 1984) 19–55.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Andrea Mitchell Center for the Study of Democracy, University of Pennsylvania, Swarthmore, PA, USA

    Brighid Brooks Kelly

Authors
  1. Brighid Brooks Kelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

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

Kelly, B.B. (2019). What Is Consociation?. In: Power-Sharing and Consociational Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14191-2_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation