Description

Case studies suggest that ethnic groups with autonomous institutional arrangements are more prone to secede, but other evidence indicates that autonomy reduces the likelihood of secession. To address this debate,

Case studies suggest that ethnic groups with autonomous institutional arrangements are more prone to secede, but other evidence indicates that autonomy reduces the likelihood of secession. To address this debate, we disaggregate their autonomy status into three categories—currently autonomous, never autonomous, and lost autonomy—and then unpack how each shapes the logic of collective action. We argue groups that were never autonomous are unlikely to mobilize due to a lack of collective action capacity, whereas currently autonomous groups may have the capacity but often lack the motivation.

application/pdf

Download count: 0

Details

Contributors
Date Created
  • 2015-01-01
Resource Type
  • Text
  • Collections this item is in
    Identifier
    • Digital object identifier: 10.1177/0010414013516927
    • Identifier Type
      International standard serial number
      Identifier Value
      1551-7144
    Note

    Citation and reuse

    Cite this item

    This is a suggested citation. Consult the appropriate style guide for specific citation guidelines.

    Siroky, David S., & Cuffe, John (2015). Lost Autonomy, Nationalism and Separatism. COMPARATIVE POLITICAL STUDIES, 48(1), 3-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010414013516927

    Machine-readable links