Party, Political and Public Identity in Power Sharing Regimes: Consociationalism and the Paradoxes of Identity Change

Abstract

This panel examines and challenges the argument that the use of consociationalism as a conflict management or resolution mechanism serves to reify conflict identities. Critics of consociationalism have claimed that by structuring political institutions and participation around these identities consociational systems are an impediment to identity change. However, advocates of consociationalism have claimed that over time, consociational power sharing may work to overcome ethnic identities in divided societies and bring about a genuine, common identity that is shared by most of the population. The papers on this panel explore these competing claims. It does so by, for example, examining the differential impact of liberal and corporate models of consociationalism, the impact of elite interaction, and the role of ethnonational political parties. Together the papers will address a substantial debate regarding a key conflict resolution theory and develop a deeper understanding as to how consociational government constraints and facilitates identity change.