English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This research seeks to enhance our understanding of consociationalism’s effectiveness in managing differences in plural societies by assessing its applicability to Pakistan. The primary objective of the paper is to determine whether consociationalism is the best solution for managing ethnic diversity in Pakistan. The article applies a mixed-methods approach and relies on secondary and primary sources. The study argues that the success of consociationalism appears uncertain in the face of intragroup party-based divisions, constant fluctuations in ethnoregional party support, the territorial nature of political grievances, and democratic instability in Pakistan. Equally, the lack of various favorable conditions for consociationalism in the case endangers its viability. In addition, the majority of all ethnolinguistic groups do not prefer consociational solutions to ethnic differences. This analysis suggests that consociationalism cannot be a one-size-fits-all solution because not all plural societies are compatible with this system. Therefore, consociationalism is not a universally viable option for all multiethnic societies, and its utility varies across cases.

Managing Diversity: Why Is Consociationalism Not an Optimal Solution for Pakistan?