Micro-States: A Specific Form of Polity?
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-9256.1990.tb00176.x |
| Author | Jeff Richards |
| Published date | 01 April 1990 |
| Date | 01 April 1990 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Politics
(1990)
lO(1)
pp40-46
MICRO=STATES
:
A
SPECIFIC
FORM
OF
POLITY?
JEFF
RICHARDS
IT
MAY
be
a matter of debate whether or not ‘small
is
beautiful’in the political
world but political scientists can learn much from the study of communities
where the influences connected with the operation of politics and government
can often be more plainly seen than
in
a large
state.
This article
is
concerned
with
an
examination
of
some of the major characteristics of such small
independent political communities, or micro-states
as
they are sometimes
called, and raises the question of whether they may reasonably
be
regarded
as
a
specific form of polity. Initially
this
involves a consideration
of
the basic
distinction between the small community which
is
part of a larger political
system and the small independent community. I then
seek
to explain how the
latter can present the paradox of over-arching pressures for conformity
coexisting with what can be at times
a
very deep factionalism. The dilemma
posed by modernisation for these communities
is
also explored, together with
some of the arguments concerning the allegedly differing characteristics
of
conflict in ‘smaller’ and ‘larger’ political systems, and the role of personality
politics. The conclusion presents the case for the recognition
of
the micro-
state
as
a specific form of polity.’
Definitions2
A
micro-state
is
a
very small state. To define
it,
however, one must
be
clear
about the meaning given
to
both ‘small’ and ‘state’. In neither case
is
the
meaning
as
obvious
as
it
might seem
at
first
sight. The contemporary notion
of
the
state
is
the product of
a
complex and varied history. It
is
a
concept of
rich and flexible significance which hinders attempts
at
precise definition.
Amongst the various criteria usually thought necessary for
an
entity wishing
to
be
regarded
as
a
state
are
a
given territory, a permanent population,
a
government, and the capacity to entertain relations with other
states.
There
are a multitude of complications here
as
far
as
‘small’ polities
are
concerned.
In short, any definition of ‘micro-state’ can only
be
arbitrary and for the
purposes of
this
short article certain working definitions
will
be adopted.
Micro-states have been defined by the United Nations Secretary-General as
‘entities which are exceptionally small
in
area, population, and human and
economic resources, and which are now emerging
as
independent states’
(UN
DOC,
1967,
para
164).
A
more specific working definition
was
given in the
UNITARSeries No
3
Status
and
Problems
ofvery Small States
and
Territories
(UNITAR,
1969,
pp
221-9)
which refers
to
polities with
a
population
of
less
than one million. It is, of course, possible to have
a
small-scale society in a very
large territory;
it
is
also
possible
to
have part of
a
large-scale society
in
a small
territory. Benedict
(1967,
p
45)
states
that ‘the criteria of scale for territories
are
land and population; the criteria
of
scale for
a
society are the number and
40
To continue reading
Request your trial