Autonomies of Scale: Precarious Self-Government on Norfolk Island

Abstract

Autonomy has been the goal of many peoples who constitute a distinct regional minority within a larger state, yet are bound to that state by shared history and constitutional ties. But autonomy is not always without drawbacks. It may, for example, mask an abdication of responsibility or neglect on the part of the national government. It may deprive the members of the autonomous region of the benefits and entitlements associated with full citizenship of the nation-state. Within the autonomous region itself, it may permit practices that would not be permitted under the laws and values of the rest of the state. Even with good will and equitable policies on both sides, autonomy may also, in some cases, be simply unmanageable. Variables relating to population size, demographic mix, cultural practices, economic viability and geographic accessibility will critically affect the suitability of a region for constitutional autonomy. A strong desire for autonomy on the part of a particular people needs to be balanced against such variables.

This paper considers claims for self-government against issues of capacity and scale, by examining the case of the self-governing Australian territory of Norfolk Island.

Keywords: Constitutional autonomy; self-determination; Norfolk Island, the ‘territories power’

JEL Classification: K10, K30