Formal and Informal Consociational Institutions: A Comparison of the National Pact and the Taif Agreement in Lebanon

Abstract

In the past decades, New Institutionalism in political science has rekindled an interest in the role of institutions and has theorized the interaction between formal and informal institutions. Unfortunately, little of this has made its way into the consociational literature. This article brings together the two bodies of work, focusing on the case of Lebanon because it allows for a unique analysis over time of the different ways in which consociational features have been institutionalized. The National Pact of 1943 was a gentleman’s agreement between the political leaders of the two main religious communities. It formed the basis of a consociational system that lasted for decades. After the civil war, the Taif Agreement reintroduced consociationalism, but this time more institutions were constitutionalized. However, it would be mistaken to view this as a simple contrast between informal (pre–civil war) versus formal (post–civil war) consociationalism, because even today the most important consociational institution is informal. This article traces the development and interaction of informal and formal consociational institutions in Lebanon. In doing so, it contributes not only to the consociational literature and the debate about the merits of liberal versus corporate consociations, but also to New Institutionalism and questions about the relative strength of formal versus informal institutions.