Abstract
Research into state size and democracy has revealed that the very smallest states are more likely to be democratic than their larger counterparts. Being an island, as well as having a British colonial past, is also associated with a state’s observance of democratic measures. With these observations in mind, this article examines an unsuccessful attempt to reform the political and constitutional governance of the Channel Island of Alderney, a self-governing dependency of the British Crown. Why was political reform rejected on this island microjurisdiction? Was the post-Brexit agenda too crowded to permit reform? Did Alderney have other priorities? Might smallness itself be the explanation?
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
