The Myth of Power-Sharing and Polarisation

Evidence from Northern Ireland

Bibliographic Data

ID6345124
AuthorsMatthew Whiting (0000-0001-9589-6409, University of Birmingham, corresponding author), Stefan Bauchowitz (Governance and Conflict Division, GIZ, Bonn, Germany)
Year2022
Volume70
Issue1
Pages81-109
Publication date2022-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitical Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0032-3217 • E-ISSN: 1467-9248
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0032321720948662
OpenAlexW3085645447
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited47

Whether power-sharing increases polarisation or not in post-conflict societies remains deeply contested. Yet, we currently lack an adequate conceptualisation of polarisation to assess the link (if any) between the two. This article offers a new conceptualisation of polarisation and uses this to gather evidence from Northern Ireland to argue that the assumption that power-sharing entrenches polarisation is not the reality that many think it is. By examining legislator voting records, speeches by party leaders, manifestos and public opinion data, we disaggregate polarisation into different issues, track it over time, and examine both elite and mass levels. We find that overall polarisation declined, albeit some limited polarisation remained in cultural and identity issues, but these were of low salience. We argue that this is the result of parties using identity instrumentally for electoral distinction in a system of convergence – a process that is independent of the effects of power-sharing

Economics · Elite · Identity (music · Legislator · Polarization (electrochemistry · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Power (physics · Power sharing · Public opinion · Salience (neuroscience · Sociology · Voting · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Irish and British Studies · Law · Psychology · Social Media and Politics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access