Between Dissolution and Blood: How Administrative Lines and Categories Shape Secessionist Outcomes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

Common wisdom and current scholarship hold that governments need to stand firm in the face of secessionist demands, since permitting the secession of one region can set a precedent for others. For this reason governments will often choose blood rather than risk dissolution. I argue that administrative organization provides states with a third option. Those regions that represent a unique administrative type stand a much better chance of seceding peacefully. Moreover, large articulated states sometimes downsize by administrative category, which helps explain why governments will release one set of units without contest while preventing another set from doing the same. Finally, secessionist movements that do not cohere with any administrative region are the least likely to be granted independence. In sum, the administrative architecture of states provides governments with a means to discriminate between secessionist demands. I test this theory in a large-N study using original data on secessionist movements and administrative units between 1816 and 2011.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)731-751
Number of pages21
JournalInternational Organization
Volume69
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 11 2015
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Political Science and International Relations
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
  • Law

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Between Dissolution and Blood: How Administrative Lines and Categories Shape Secessionist Outcomes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this