Navigating hyper-fragmentation in small states: a comparison of Solomon Islands and Vanuatu

Democratization scholars commonly assume that cultural or ethnic fragmentation hinders democratic transition and consolidation. However, publications in this field rarely look at the type of social diversity or the number of different social groups. This chapter seeks to shed light on these aspects by providing a comparison between two small states – Solomon Islands and Vanuatu – that are not only among the most socially heterogeneous countries in the world, but also have strong records of democratic rule since the attainment of independence about 40 years ago. Based on original fieldwork and 38 semi-structured interviews with local political elites in both countries, we seek to discover how stability and democracy have been maintained in the face of societal hyper-fragmentation. After a brief theory section in which we discuss existing studies on the effects of cultural diversity and small state size on democratic development, we provide an in-depth analysis of the day-to-day functioning of Solomon Island and ni-Vanuatu politics. On this basis, we find that hyper-fragmentation has certainly caused political problems for these states, as it has caused considerable instability, stymied state capacity, and encouraged corruption. On the other hand, we also find that hyper-fragmentation has meant that it has been harder – if not impossible – for one group to dominate. Indeed, rather than democracy not working in these settings, it is very hard to see how any other post-colonial regime type would function at all.