Unstable Concepts, Unresolved Controversies: Reassembling Power-Sharing, Consociationalism, and Centripetalism

After half a century of research, the literature on institutional design for ethnic conflict management is still in search of a scientific consensus. This article argues that underlying conceptual issues hinder cumulative research on consociationalism to centripetalism. The reformulation of these concepts as "institutional packages" and their grouping under the label "power-sharing" have resulted in conceptual instability. Instead of contributing to gradually closing the controversy, empirical studies consequently lead to the proliferation of debates about case classification. Having identified these issues, the article formulates five recommendations to reassemble the concepts in a way that fosters constructive discussions in the field.