Democracy in microstates: why smallness does not produce a democratic political system

Abstract

In recent decades, several scholars have pointed to a statistical correlation between population size and democracy. Whereas these studies have thus far failed to provide a satisfactory explanation of this link, more case-oriented and qualitative publications have primarily highlighted the democracy-undermining effects of smallness. According to such studies, the proclivity of microstates to democratic rule should be explained on the basis of other factors, which coincide with smallness. In the current article, the nature and quality of politics and democracy in the four microstates of San Marino, St Kitts and Nevis, Seychelles, and Palau is analysed on the basis of interviews with local respondents. The results indicate that microstate politics is characterized by a disparity between formally democratic institutions and a more antidemocratic political reality, and that size therefore does not directly generate a democratic political system. Instead, for the four analysed microstates the variables of colonial history, geographical location, and international relations appear to have greater explanatory value. Precisely because microstate politics is all about interpersonal relations and informal dynamics, this article contends that qualitative research is the preferable approach for studying politics and democracy in microstates.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 51 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.