Abstract
Federalism and non-territorial autonomy (NTA) have in common that both kinds of arrangements have been proposed, especially in the post-Cold War era, as possible solutions for the successful management of ethno-cultural conflict, regarding both their prevention and solution. They are very different, however, in terms of their history in theory and practice, as well as their core idea. Federalism refers – not necessarily but following its classical understanding – to a territorial arrangement, while NTA denotes, as the name suggests, a non-territorial one. This chapter aims to explore how federalism is related to NTA and compares to it. To this end, section 2 demonstrates how both have experienced a revival in the 1990s. Section 3 then explores points of conceptual convergence or divergence based on how both arrangements are related to four key issues: How do they come into being? How are they related to the idea of self-rule? How are they linked to the idea of shared rule? What role does democracy play as a presumably important context factor for both kinds of arrangements? Section 4 concludes.