Does the notion of non-territorial autonomy bring about any added value?

Abstract

The article overviews three books about different dimensions and aspects of so-called non-territorial autonomy for ethnic groups (NTA). This umbrella term applies to a range of different practices and settings, which are not numerous and cannot be regarded as a novelty or an effective tool of government. The reviewed books consider the political contexts and origins of NTA as well as the role of autonomy arrangements in minorities’ participation in public life and the protection of cultural rights and contribute to the analysis of individual country-cases. Nevertheless, the volumes fail to scrutinize and reflect on recent developments in scholarship and practice; on the contrary, they uncritically reproduce the major established stereotypes and fallacies. In particular, the volumes’ authors tend to neglect some questions that empirical data available prompt: the reasons for and outcomes of NTA’s conceptual stretching, the practical significance of the arrangements labelled as NTA, and the added value that the very concept brings about. Building on this criticism, the author lists these and other relevant research issues related to the usage as NTA as a practical and analytical category: the reasons for the failure or marginality of most NTA endeavours, the social production of groupness under the tag of NTA, the functioning of ethnicity-based organizations, and the need to reflect on scholarly activities which that often rest on the negligence of empirics in favour of normative prescriptions or the promotion of non-issues.