Insular Autonomy: A Framework for Conflict Resolution?

Among conflict regulation methods aiming at managing rather than eliminating ethnic differences, we find a ‘grey area’: autonomy (McGarry and O’Leary 1993: 32). It is this concept that this chapter seeks to clarify through a comparative study of two different autonomies in Western Europe: the Åland Islands and Corsica. Since both are insular regions, the task of defining the territory and people concerned by the autonomy arrangement is an easy one. In both cases, territory is the primary reference point for identity, and one finds a dominant group with a strong linguistic identity, a small group of members of the majority society, and smaller immigrant communities. They share common challenges related to insularity such as a high cost of transport and a seasonal economy, as well as a certain isolation due to their peripheral location. Another common feature is that both belong to traditionally unitary states. Beyond these similarities, however, marked differences emerge when one looks at the current political, economic and social situation and especially at the institutional arrangements, which result from the different approaches adopted by Finland and France in response to a self-determination conflict in the regions concerned. The degree of success thus far is markedly different, too, in the two cases. Åland’s wide-ranging political autonomy, established in 1920–22 with the help of the League of Nations, and further developed jointly by the Finnish and Åland authorities, is often cited by international experts as a successful example of conflict resolution.