Indonesian Autonomies: Explaining Divergent Self-Government Outcomes in Aceh and Papua

Shane Joshua Barter, Hipolitus Wangge

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle


    A form of power-sharing, territorial autonomy is essential for managing separatism. Indonesia provides two non-Western cases to illuminate what makes autonomy work. In Aceh, autonomy helped to overcome conflict and can be regarded as successful, while in Papua, autonomy has failed, evident in continued unrest. Within the same country, the same institutional response to violent separatism has generated divergent self-government outcomes. Why has autonomy succeeded in Aceh, but failed in Papua? Utilizing within-case and temporal comparisons, we suggest that the content of autonomy may be less important than the process through which it unfolds. The powers granted to Aceh and Papua are similar, although how self-government was negotiated and whom it empowered varied. Early in Aceh and in Papua, autonomy was essentially imposed, empowering corrupt leaders, and sidelining dissidents. Aceh's ultimately successful autonomy was negotiated and saw popular former rebels take the reins of self-government.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)55-81
    JournalPublius: The Journal of Federalism
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - 2018


    Dive into the research topics of 'Indonesian Autonomies: Explaining Divergent Self-Government Outcomes in Aceh and Papua'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this