IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wzbtci/spiv2020101.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

To fight or to vote: Sovereignty referendums as strategies in conflicts over self-determination

Author

Listed:
  • Kelle, Friederike Luise
  • Sienknecht, Mitja

Abstract

Subnational groups employ a variety of strategies to contest governments. While democratic states offer a broader array of accessible options, autocratic regimes are more difficult to contest via conventional means. Why do subnational groups stage sovereignty referendums across regime types? Our argument is that public votes over greater autonomy or independence signal adherence to international democratic norms and the legitimacy of the demand towards three audiences: the state, the domestic population, and the international community. Self-determination groups seek to gain support from their domestic constituency as well as the international community in order to pressure the state government into granting concessions. We introduce a new dataset of referendums and international diplomacy by subnational self-determination groups on a global scale between 1990 and 2015. We supplement the descriptive evidence and assess the plausibility of the proposed mechanism with an out-of-sample case of an in-sample observation, the 2017 independence referendum in Iraqi Kurdistan. We show that referendums are indeed associated with international diplomacy and domestic state building by self-determination groups, suggesting that both tools are critical for the choice of conventional strategies across regime types.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbtci:spiv2020101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/214650/1/1690457155.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Coggins, Bridget, 2011. "Friends in High Places: International Politics and the Emergence of States from Secessionism," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 433-467, July.
    2. 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.
    3. Zacher, Mark W., 2001. "The Territorial Integrity Norm: International Boundaries and the Use of Force," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 215-250, April.
    4. Barbara F. Walter, 2006. "Building Reputation: Why Governments Fight Some Separatists but Not Others," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(2), pages 313-330, April.
    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. Mende, Janne, 2020. "Business authority in global governance: Beyond public and private," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-103, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. Stephen, Matthew D., 2020. "China's new multilateral institutions: A framework and research agenda," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2020-102, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Haikun Zhu, 2018. "Social Stability and Resource Allocation within Business Groups," Working Papers Series 79, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    6. Klaus Abbink & Jordi Brandts, 2016. "Political autonomy and independence: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(3), pages 461-496, July.
    7. Beth A. Simmons, 2002. "Capacity, Commitment, and Compliance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(6), pages 829-856, December.
    8. Faisal Z. Ahmed, 2022. "From grievances to civil war: The impact of geopolitics," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 427-451, July.
    9. Joakim Kreutz, 2012. "From Tremors to Talks: Do Natural Disasters Produce Ripe Moments for Resolving Separatist Conflicts?," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 482-502, September.
    10. Zachary Liscow, 2012. "Why fight secession? Evidence of economic motivations from the American Civil War," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 37-54, October.
    11. Casey Crisman-Cox, 2022. "Democracy, reputation for resolve, and civil conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(3), pages 382-394, May.
    12. Paul R. Hensel & Michael E. Allison & Ahmed Khanani, 2009. "Territorial Integrity Treaties and Armed Conflict over Territory," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(2), pages 120-143, April.
    13. Lingyu Lu & Cameron G. Thies, 2010. "Trade Interdependence and the Issues at Stake in the Onset of Militarized Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(4), pages 347-368, September.
    14. Idean Salehyan, 2010. "The Delegation of War to Rebel Organizations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(3), pages 493-515, June.
    15. David B Carter, 2017. "History as a double-edged sword," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 16(4), pages 400-421, November.
    16. Efe Tokdemir & Evgeny Sedashov & Sema Hande Ogutcu-Fu & Carlos E. Moreno Leon & Jeremy Berkowitz & Seden Akcinaroglu, 2021. "Rebel Rivalry and the Strategic Nature of Rebel Group Ideology and Demands," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(4), pages 729-758, April.
    17. David S Siroky & Milos Popovic & Nikola Mirilovic, 2021. "Unilateral secession, international recognition, and great power contestation," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(5), pages 1049-1067, September.
    18. Scott Wolford, 2020. "War and diplomacy on the world stage: Crisis bargaining before third parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(2), pages 235-261, April.
    19. Darin Christensen, 2018. "The Geography of Repression in Africa," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(7), pages 1517-1543, August.
    20. Carlo Koos, 2016. "Does violence pay? The effect of ethnic rebellion on overcoming political deprivation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(1), pages 3-24, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    self-determination; conflict; referendum; rebel diplomacy; domestic institutionbuilding; Selbstbestimmung; Konflikt; Referendum; Rebellendiplomatie; Aufbau substaatlicher Institutionen;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:wzbtci:spiv2020101. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ggwzbde.html .

    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.