Consociational Theory

Taylor, Rupert

doi:10.4324/9780203962565

Cited by 149 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Following early disruptions and a suspension of the government between 2002 and 2007, a power-sharing government did serve out the full term of office from 2007 to 2011; subsequently the arrangements continued and devolved government seemed to be on a more secure footing. Consociationalism was justified on the grounds of a negotiated agreement between the political parties and the British government and as countering the exclusion of communities and their political representatives from government and as consolidating the ceasefires (Taylor 2009). This form of compulsory power-sharing has several consequences for the policy-making process.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Policy Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative research and policy-making in Northern Ireland: barriers arising from the lack of consensus, capacity and conceptualization

Birrell¹

2013

Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the formal policy-making process in Northern Ireland and the use of qualitative research. The multi-level nature of governance is explained with the division between devolved and non-devolved powers and the respective roles of the Northern Ireland Government and the UK Government as well as the different levels of policy-making within the Northern Ireland system of governance. Institutions for policy-making set up in 1999, following the Good Friday Agreement are based on a form of consociationalism or power sharing, which produces a coalition government involving all the main parties. The nature of government strategy statements, consultation papers, legislative proposals, Assembly committee reports and policy documentation is examined in terms of their use of qualitative analysis and evidence. It is argued that the limited use of qualitative research and evidence reflects three main factors: a lack of political consensus, a deficiency in policy capacity and an absence of conceptual analysis. These barriers to the use of qualitative evidence and the promotion of qualitative research are also put in a wider context of a range of constraints in the form of political, ideological, communal and vested interests.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of the Policy Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative research and policy-making in Northern Ireland: barriers arising from the lack of consensus, capacity and conceptualization

Birrell¹

2013

Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 Many cases of powersharing are internationally driven and reveal features beyond these four traditional consociational facets, such as provisions on security sector reform and military power-sharing, refugee returns and, in some cases, cross border institutions. 12 The UN has supported power-sharing in a diversity of situations, including in Madagascar, Zimbabwe, Cyprus and Iraq, and has created the position of Senior Adviser on Power-Sharing as part of a Stand-By Team located in the Mediation Support Unit of the Department of Political Affairs. 13 The upshot of increased international support for power-sharing is that it risks viewing polarization between ethno-national groups in conflict as permanent.…”

Section: Power-sharing Between Ethno-national Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender, Representation and Power-Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions

Byrne¹,

McCulloch²

2012

International Peacekeeping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An emerging tension characterizes conflict resolution practice: promoting power-sharing between ethnic groups while simultaneously mandating women's inclusion in peace processes and in post-conflict institutions. Scholars of ethnic conflict have not adequately theorized the gender implications of power-sharing, and practitioners have failed to implement mechanisms that would make power-sharing representative of constituencies beyond ethno-national cleavages. There is no substantive reason why the representation of women and ethnic groups should be in tension. Nevertheless, gender is often ignored in the power-sharing literature and gender-mainstreaming practices appear irreconcilable with power-sharing practice. Drawing on three cases of post-conflict power-sharingBosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, and Northern Ireland -this article identifies reasons why this tension remains in practice, especially the overriding emphasis in powersharing on ethno-nationalist elites and conflict protagonists.Over the last decade, conflict resolution scholars and practitioners have increasingly promoted power-sharing institutions in ethnically divided societies. Powersharing entails the participation and representation of all ethnic groups in conflict resolution and post-conflict institutions and, when confronted by ethnic conflicts, is favoured by international organizations including the UN. At the same time, international agencies and advocacy networks have been drawing attention to the role of women in peacebuilding. The UN calls for member states to increase women's participation in the negotiation and implementation of peace agreements. Drawing on UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000), on 'Women, Peace and Security' (WPS), feminist scholars and activists are carving out a role for women in conflict resolution and post-conflict peacebuilding. Yet a tension is evident: ethnic conflict scholars have yet to adequately theorize the gendered implications of power-sharing arrangements, while practitioners have yet to implement the kind of mechanisms that would make power-sharing constituencies representative beyond ethno-national-sectarian cleavages.This article examines three cases of ethnicized conflict in which power-sharing was implemented as part of a larger peace process. In two cases, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in 1995 and Northern Ireland in 1998, power-sharing was adopted prior to Resolution 1325. In a third case, Burundi, a transitional peace agreement was adopted in 2000, and power-sharing was constitutionally enshrined in 2005. The cases illustrate some of the challenges in reconciling the inclusion of women with the inclusion of ethno-national groups. The analysis is centred on Resolution 1325, given its specific emphasis on women's

show abstract

“…However it is the ethno-national explanations that have guided the institutional management that has been applied to the conflict through the 1998 Belfast Agreement; an ethno-national conflict has been treated with the classic ethno-national solution, consociationalism. 15 Northern Ireland's journey from one-party rule to ethnic "democracy" Much of the democratization literature (understandably) focuses on the process through which authoritarian regimes become democracies. Northern Ireland, while not exactly fitting this mould, certainly underwent a process of democratization from the one-party democracy which governed under the Stormont regime from 1921-1972 to consociational democracy constituted by the agreement of 1998, which institutionalizes ethno-national representation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religion and democratization in Northern Ireland: is religion actually ethnicity in disguise?

O’Malley

Walsh

2013

Democratization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few parts of Europe see as much religious observance as Northern Ireland, and fewer places in Europe have religion as one of the major cleavages on which politics seems to rest. In this article we argue that although religion is an important identifier, it acts as a reinforcer of ethno-national differences rather than as an intrinsically important difference itself. Religious differences while often symbolically important rarely emerge as points of real conflict in Northern Irish politics. It has had little impact on the ongoing process of democratization in Northern Ireland. We review an array of evidence which supports this conclusion. However, we find that religion still has a power to divide and so makes a political settlement less likely than an accommodation.

show abstract

Consociational Theory

Cited by 149 publications

References 0 publications

Qualitative research and policy-making in Northern Ireland: barriers arising from the lack of consensus, capacity and conceptualization

Qualitative research and policy-making in Northern Ireland: barriers arising from the lack of consensus, capacity and conceptualization

Gender, Representation and Power-Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions

Religion and democratization in Northern Ireland: is religion actually ethnicity in disguise?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About