Concept and origins
Lijphart (1969) focused on cases such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and Austria, where democracy remained stable despite societies split into distinct subcultures. He attributed this to elites of each group choosing compromise and cooperation over competition, challenging the conventional view that deep cleavages make democracy unstable.
The four features
Lijphart (1977) identified grand coalitions including all major groups, a mutual veto to protect vital interests, proportionality in offices and funds, and segmental autonomy in areas such as education and culture. He later broadened the idea into the consensus democracy model contrasted with majoritarian democracy, and in 2004 proposed it as a principle of constitutional design for divided societies.
Critiques and alternatives
Barry (1975) questioned the case interpretations and the causal claim that elite cooperation produced stability. Lustick (1997) asked whether the way the theory expanded to absorb counterexamples was scientifically progressive. Horowitz (1985) proposed integrative institutions encouraging cross-group cooperation rather than entrenching group boundaries. Andeweg (2000) synthesized these debates.
FAQ
- What is consociational democracy in simple terms?
- In countries with different religious or language groups, leaders of each group share power and govern together to reduce conflict.
- Is it the same as consensus democracy?
- Similar but not identical. Consociationalism focuses on power-sharing in deeply divided societies, while consensus democracy generalizes the idea into a democratic type contrasted with majoritarianism.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Lijphart, A. (1969). Consociational democracy. World Politics, 21(2), 207–225. The article that introduced the concept.
- Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in plural societies: A comparative exploration. Yale University Press. Systematizes the four core features.
- Barry, B. (1975). Political accommodation and consociational democracy. British Journal of Political Science, 5(4), 477–505. Early critique of the theory.
- Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic groups in conflict. University of California Press. The centripetal alternative.
- Lustick, I. S. (1997). Lijphart, Lakatos, and consociationalism. World Politics, 50(1), 88–117. Methodological critique of the research program.
- Andeweg, R. B. (2000). Consociational democracy. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 509–536. Comprehensive review of the literature.
- Lijphart, A. (2004). Constitutional design for divided societies. Journal of Democracy, 15(2), 96–109. Application to constitutional design.