Somalia's federal experiment: Origins, institutional design and implications for trust and national reconciliation

This study examines the foundational logic of Somalia's federal experiment, exploring its historical origins, institutional rationale, and capacity to promote trust-building and national reconciliation through a multilevel societal lens that incorporates the lived experiences of ordinary citizens alongside key societal intermediaries. Despite over a decade of federal governance, empirical research on how ordinary citizens perceive the origins and societal impact of this system remains limited. Employing a qualitative design, the study utilized 37 in-depth interviews and five focus group discussions involving 30 community participants (N = 67). The participants included a diverse cross-section of academics, traditional elders, civil society actors, and political figures across Somalia's federal member states and diaspora. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis via QDA Miner Lite. The findings indicate that citizens view the formation of federal member states through three pathways: rebel-led formations, politically engineered transition states, and externally mediated hybrid formations. Participants largely attributed the adoption of federalism to external influences and elite bargaining rather than broad domestic consensus. While the federal arrangement has contributed to procedural stability, it has institutionalized clan-based political identities and failed to generate substantive, intergovernmental trust. Furthermore, the current federal structures serve primarily as elite conflict-management tools rather than drivers of grassroots national reconciliation. The study concludes that transitioning from elite compromise to cooperative governance requires transparent constitutional reforms, inclusive dispute resolution mechanisms, and the integration of culturally rooted reconciliation practices.