IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v9y2021i4p426-438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relevance of Language as a Predictor of the Will for Independence in Catalonia in 1996 and 2020

Author

Listed:
  • Jordi Argelaguet

    (Department of Political Science and Public Law, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

The Catalan secessionist parties, if added together, have won all the elections to the Parliament of Catalonia from 2010 to 2021. Their voters have been increasingly mobilized since the start of the controversial reform process of the Statute of Autonomy (2004–2010). The aim of this article is twofold. First, it intends to test whether language is the strongest predictor in preferring independence in two separate and distinct moments, 1996 and 2020. And second, to assess whether its strength has changed—and how—between both years. Only the most exogenous variables to the dependent variable are used in each of two logistic regressions to avoid problems of endogeneity: sex, age, size of town of residence, place of birth of the individual and of their parents, first language (L1), and educational level. Among them, L1 was—and still is—the most powerful predictor, although it is not entirely determinative. The secessionist movement not only gathers a plurality of Catalan native speakers, but it receives a not insignificant level of support among those who have Spanish as their L1. Conversely, the unionist group, despite being composed primarily by people who have Spanish as their L1 and have their family origins outside Catalonia, has a native Catalan-speaking minority inside. This imperfect division, which is based on ethnolinguistic alignments—and whose relevance cannot be neglected—alleviates the likelihood of an ethnic-based conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Jordi Argelaguet, 2021. "The Relevance of Language as a Predictor of the Will for Independence in Catalonia in 1996 and 2020," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 426-438.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:426-438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4531
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xavier Cuadras Morató & Toni Rodon, 2017. "The Dog that Didn’t Bark: On the Effect of the Great Recession on the Surge of Secessionism," Working Papers 968, Barcelona School of Economics.
    2. José M. Oller & Albert Satorra & Adolf Tobeña, 2019. "Unveiling pathways for the fissure among secessionists and unionists in Catalonia: identities, family language, and media influence," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Adolfo Maza & José Villaverde & María Hierro, 2019. "The 2017 Regional Election in Catalonia: an attempt to understand the pro-independence vote," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 36(1), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Griffiths, Ryan D., 2015. "Between Dissolution and Blood: How Administrative Lines and Categories Shape Secessionist Outcomes," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(3), pages 731-751, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ferran Requejo & Marc Sanjaume-Calvet, 2021. "Explaining Secessionism: What Do We Really Know About It?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 371-375.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adolfo Maza & María Hierro, 2022. "Attempting to measure the intensity of opposing feelings in elections: A polarization approach to Catalonia’s independence case," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(2), pages 323-344, July.
    2. Nils-Christian Bormann & Burcu Savun, 2018. "Reputation, concessions, and territorial civil war," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(5), pages 671-686, September.
    3. Vanschoonbeek, Jakob, 2020. "Regional (in)stability in Europe a quantitative model of state fragmentation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 605-641.
    4. Jo Reynaerts & Jakob Vanschoonbeek, 2022. "The economics of state fragmentation: Assessing the economic impact of secession," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(1), pages 82-115, January.
    5. Hyun-Chool Lee & Alexandre Repkine, 2022. "A Spatial Analysis of the Voting Patterns in the South Korean General Elections of 2016," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-24, August.
    6. Stephen Ansolabehere & M. Socorro Puy, 2020. "Separatism and Identity: A comparative analysis of the Basque and Catalan cases," Working Papers 2020-03, Universidad de Málaga, Department of Economic Theory, Málaga Economic Theory Research Center.
    7. Nicholas Sambanis & Micha Germann & Andreas Schädel, 2018. "SDM: A New Data Set on Self-determination Movements with an Application to the Reputational Theory of Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(3), pages 656-686, March.
    8. Martijn Huysmans & Christophe Crombez, 2020. "Making exit costly but efficient: the political economy of exit clauses and secession," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 89-110, March.
    9. Martijn Huysmans & Christophe Crombez, 2017. "Making exit costly but efficient: the political economy of exit clauses and secession," LICOS Discussion Papers 39717, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    10. Kelle, Friederike Luise & Sienknecht, Mitja, 2020. "To fight or to vote: Sovereignty referendums as strategies in conflicts over self-determination," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-101, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    11. José M. Oller & Albert Satorra & Adolf Tobeña, 2019. "Unveiling pathways for the fissure among secessionists and unionists in Catalonia: identities, family language, and media influence," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
    12. Vanschoonbeek, Jakob, 2020. "Divided We Stad: a Fiscal Bargaining Model for Divided Countries," MPRA Paper 101863, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Ryan D. Griffiths & Louis M. Wasser, 2019. "Does Violent Secessionism Work?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(5), pages 1310-1336, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:426-438. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.