Consolidation of Ethnopolitical Identities and Limits of Representation

Ethnicised politics poses both constraints and opportunities for representation of cross-segmental interests in contemporary societies. Constraints can be formal (e.g., rules of representation might require individuals to identify with a recognised group/ community to benefit from quota or guaranteed seats, and limit the political space for those who are not recognised as "politically relevant") or informal (e.g., a political culture that privileges group-sensitive representation will disproportionately focus on ethnic/cultural/linguistic markers at the expense of more situational, ideological or ‘bread and butter’ issues) (Murtagh 2015; Carlà 2018). We welcome papers that query differential outcomes of ethnopolitical cleavage consolidation, and their impact on political participation of citizens in formal and informal political process. Different types of cross-segmental concerns lend themselves to pursuit through different avenues depending, for example in divided societies, on the level of consolidation of ethnopolitical representation and political institutions (Agarin 2021; Fakhoury 2014), in contested political contexts on issue salience and past experience of mobilisation and accommodation of cross-segmental claims. We are looking forward to paper proposals discussing the impact of the logic of group-based representation on cross-segmental mobilisation, participation and representation esp. of minorities seeking representation of their group-relevant concerns; the differential impact of accommodation on demands by gender and sexual minorities and/or those of territorially dispersed groups, such as the Roma, who may find themselves marginalised as a result of their preference for intersectional accommodation. Papers could include comparative or single-case studies of the constraints and opportunities available in identity-based political institutions for representation of cross-segmental interests.