IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v26y1996i02p269-283_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why is Secession Difficult in Well-Established Democracies? Lessons from Quebec

Author

Listed:
  • Dion, Stéphane

Abstract

Secession, defined as ‘formal withdrawal from a central authority by a member unit’, has been particularly rare in democracies. In fact, there has never been a single case of secession in democracies if we consider only the well-established ones, that is, those with at least ten consecutive years of universal suffrage. The cases most often mentioned happened only a few years after the introduction or significant expansion of universal suffrage: Norway and Sweden in 1905, Iceland and Denmark in 1918, Ireland and the United Kingdom in 1922. What is more, one would hesitate before calling the first two cases real secessions, since the ties between the political entities involved were very loose at the outset. Secessionists never managed to split a well-established democracy through a referendum or an electoral victory. We must conclude that it is very hard for them to achieve and maintain the magic number of 50 per cent support. My aim is to explain why this is the case.

Suggested Citation

  • Dion, Stéphane, 1996. "Why is Secession Difficult in Well-Established Democracies? Lessons from Quebec," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 269-283, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:26:y:1996:i:02:p:269-283_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123400000466/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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.
    2. Alexander Libman, 2015. "Words or deeds: what matters? On the role of symbolic action in political decentralization," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 801-838, November.
    3. Anwen Elias & Núria Franco-Guillén, 2021. "Justifying Secession in Catalonia: Resolving Grievances or a Means to a Better Future?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 453-464.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:bjposi:v:26:y:1996:i:02:p:269-283_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    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.