Conclusion: Patterns of Non-Territorial Autonomy

Coakley, John

doi:10.1080/17449057.2015.1101840

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These studies eschewed considerations on the original model's complexities, yet they followed a similar structure to Nimni's volume, seeking both greater conceptual clarity and outlining an increasing number of case studies (on NTA exclusively or combining TA and NTA). These include a range of CEE cases as well as regimes presenting NTA elements, such as those of Maori in New Zealand, Sami in Norway, and French-speakers (outside Québec) in Canada (Semb 2005;Nimni, Osipov, and Smith 2013;Salat et al 2014;Malloy and Palermo 2015;Malloy, Osipov, and Vizi 2015;Coakley 2016a;Falch, Selle, and Strømsne 2016;Hill 2016).…”

Section: Functionality and Underlying Meanings: From Macro To Micro Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Classifications based on levels of effectiveness are, similarly, linked by to institutionalized channels regulating autonomy through diffusion of powers from the state. Comparably, Coakley (2016aCoakley ( , 2016b sought to analyze, through a range of case studies, objectives and characteristics of NTA systems. These studies have further highlighted factors for success of NTA regimes: classified NTA models on the basis of their "voice," on a spectrum ranging from functioning self-governing institutions to merely "symbolic" policies ("nonvoice").…”

Section: Functionality and Underlying Meanings: From Macro To Micro Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nonterritorial Autonomy and Minority (Dis)Empowerment: Past, Present, and Future

Prina

2020

Nationalities Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review article outlines the literature on nonterritorial autonomy (NTA) from the renewed interest in the concept in the mid-2000s until today. First, the article provides a brief overview of the meaning of NTA and the rationale behind it, highlighting how, in academic literature, NTA oscillates between positions that treat it as an attractive option and a highly impractical system (difficult to realize in practice or even pin down conceptually). Second, the article looks at trends in the existing literature, which has approached NTA with various emphases: the functions it fulfils (or has fulfilled); its (at times) supplementary role vis-à-vis territorial autonomy; and the dynamics that have led to its introduction in some countries, with attendant implications. Third, the article outlines some of NTA’s complexities, suggesting future areas of research, with reference to the interaction of territoriality and nonterritoriality, collective rights and participation, and potentially negative consequences of NTA regimes.

show abstract

Section: Functionality and Underlying Meanings: From Macro To Micro Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Functionality and Underlying Meanings: From Macro To Micro Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonterritorial Autonomy and Minority (Dis)Empowerment: Past, Present, and Future

Prina

2020

Nationalities Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In both cases, NCA is portrayed as a potentially promising mechanism for boosting political stability and social cohesion within states, by enabling national minorities to participate fully and effectively in public life. NCA is seen as having particular merit because it grants these possibilities to minority communities while avoiding any explicit institutional linkage between ethnicity and territory (Roshwald 2007;Coakley 2016). State governments, it is reasoned, are invariably reluctant to countenance minority claims for territorial autonomy, since they see this as undermining their sovereignty as well as potentially threatening the integrity of the state.…”

Section: National-cultural Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

The “Quadratic Nexus” Revisited: Nation-Building in Estonia Through the Prism of National Cultural Autonomy

Smith

2019

Nationalities Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores how the concept of minority national-cultural autonomy (NCA) has been defined and practiced in contemporary Estonia, combining data from interviews and previously unanalyzed archival sources to trace debates and policymaking processes back to 1988 and ascertain: why (and for whom) NCA was adopted; the functions ascribed to NCA institutions; and the effectiveness and legitimacy of the model in the eyes of different "noncore" ethnic communities. In so doing, the article uses NCA as a fresh lens for analyzing the more general politics of post-Soviet state and nation-building in the country, situating this case within the "Quadratic Nexus" framework. Estonia's NCA law is generally viewed as irrelevant to ongoing issues of diversity governance in the country. However, Finnish and Swedish minority autonomies have been established and, in recent years, there have been three applications to establish a Russian NCA. None have been approved, and yet some authors see them as evidence that NCA could (and should) have a role to play in bringing about a more meaningful accommodation of ethnic diversity. Having reviewed the evidence, however, the article concludes that this claim is misplaced.

show abstract

“…David Smith 2016 to which this system is authentically non-territorial, and genuinely autonomous. A final article (Coakley, 2016) draws these strands together and attempts to arrive at some comparative conclusions.…”

Section: Selecting Cases For Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: Dispersed Minorities and Non-Territorial Autonomy

Coakley¹

2018

Non-Territorial Autonomy in Divided Societies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of non-territorial autonomy gives rise to at least two important questions: the range of functional areas over which autonomy extends, and the extent to which this autonomy is indeed non-territorial. A widely used early description significantly labelled this 'national cultural autonomy', implying that its focus is mainly on cultural matters, such as language, religion, education and family law. In many of the cases that are commonly cited, 'autonomy' may not even extend this far: its most visible expression is the existence of separate electoral registers or quotas for the various groups. Part of the dilemma lies in the difficulty of devolving substantial power on a non-territorial basis: to the extent that devolved institutions are state-like, they ideally require a defined territory. Ethnic groups, however, vary in the extent to which they are territorially concentrated, and therefore in the degree to which any autonomous arrangements for them are territorial or non-territorial. This article explores the dilemma generated by this tension between ethnic geography (patterns of ethnic settlement) and political autonomy (degree of self-rule), and introduces a set of case studies where the relationship between these two features is discussed further: the Ottoman empire and its successor states, the Habsburg monarchy, the Jewish minorities of Europe, interwar Estonia, contemporary Belgium, and two indigenous peoples, the Sámi in Norway and the Maori in New Zealand.

show abstract

Conclusion: Patterns of Non-Territorial Autonomy

Cited by 19 publications

References 28 publications

Nonterritorial Autonomy and Minority (Dis)Empowerment: Past, Present, and Future

Nonterritorial Autonomy and Minority (Dis)Empowerment: Past, Present, and Future

The “Quadratic Nexus” Revisited: Nation-Building in Estonia Through the Prism of National Cultural Autonomy

Introduction: Dispersed Minorities and Non-Territorial Autonomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About