ABSTRACT
An increasing number of states rely on decentralization to address or preempt self-determination conflicts. However, in spite of its popularity among policymakers, the consequences of decentralization for managing secessionist struggles remain contested, with some arguing that decentralization fuels rather than stems conflict and state disintegration. This chapter reviews this continuing debate by discussing arguments and evidence from recent studies. In so doing, it highlights three significant theoretical and methodological developments. First, it discusses endeavors to account for the difficult circumstances in which decentralization is often adopted in the first place, which may affect the subsequent chances of peace and stability. Second, it highlights the increased attention given to decentralized institutions’ societal context. Third, the chapter points to studies emphasizing decentralization’s specific institutional design, which – along with its societal context – may critically moderate its consequences. Together, this chapter argues, these developments hold the promise of transcending the still indeterminate ‘pro and con’ debate on how decentralization affects secessionist struggles.
