Territorial pluralism is a form of political autonomy designed to accommodate national, ethnic, or linguistic differences within a state. It has the potential to provide for the peaceful, democratic, and just management of difference. But given traditional concerns about state sovereignty and unity, how realistic is it to expect that a state will agree to recognize and empower distinct substate communities? The contributors to this book answer this question by examining a wide variety of cases, including those in developing and industrialized states and democratic and authoritarian regimes. They find that territorial pluralism remains a legitimate and effective means for managing difference in multinational states.

During the last two decades serious attempts to alter basic constitutional structures have taken place in many industrial nations, even in those often thought to have highly stable political institutions. In some cases, such as Belgium and Spain, far-reaching constitutional changes have been put in place; in others advocates of reform have achieved only partial victories or have been entirely frustrated. In all cases, controversy over the constitution has been intense, involving basic conceptions of legitimacy, representation, sovereignty and the purposes of the state. Constitutional politics often reveals much about political life of modern societies that is obscured in day-to-day events. The results of constitutional changes can significantly affect the distribution of power, the ability to manage conflict and the outcomes of policy debates. This book explores the dynamics of constitutional politics through case studies of Spain, Belgium, Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, West Germany and Eastern Europe, including Poland, prepared by leading students of these countries. Other chapters draw out the more general patterns of constitutional politics, highlighting the pressures which lead to change, and the formidable obstacles confronting them.

Territorial pluralism is a form of political autonomy designed to accommodate national, ethnic, or linguistic differences within a state. It has the potential to provide for the peaceful, democratic, and just management of difference. But given traditional concerns about state sovereignty and unity, how realistic is it to expect that a state will agree to recognize and empower distinct substate communities? The contributors to this book answer this question by examining a wide variety of cases, including those in developing and industrialized states and democratic and authoritarian regimes. They find that territorial pluralism remains a legitimate and effective means for managing difference in multinational states.

Over the past decade, the introspective, insular, and largely atheoretical style that informed Canadian political science for most of the postwar period has given way to a deeper engagement with, and integration into, the global field of comparative politics. This volume is the first sustained attempt to describe, analyze, and assess the "comparative turn" in Canadian political science. Canada's engagement with comparative politics is examined with a focus on three central questions: In what ways, and how successfully, have Canadian scholars contributed to the study of comparative politics? How does study of the Canadian case advance the comparative discipline? Finally, can Canadian practice and policy be reproduced in other countries?