Mixed-methods study examines diaspora representation and its challenges in four Polynesian micro-states, suggesting implications for political legitimacy.
Introduction Why is institutionalized diaspora representation sustained in some countries while rejected or abolished in others? Although external voting systems have expanded globally in recent decades, the conditions under which diaspora representation can be sustained over the long term remain insufficiently theorized. The current study addresses this gap by examining the institutional sustainability of diaspora representation in four Polynesian micro-states: the Cook Islands, Samoa, Tonga, and Tuvalu. Methods The study employs a mixed-methods approach combining qualitative process tracing with quantitative electoral indicators, drawing on parliamentary records, constitutional debates, and electoral data. The analysis focuses on the Overseas Constituency System in the Cook Islands, introduced in 1981 and abolished in 2003, and situates this case in comparative perspective by examining the persistent non-adoption of similar institutions in the other three countries. Results The findings suggest that the sustainability of diaspora representation is constrained by tensions between transnational political participation and territorially grounded political accountability. Discussion The study proposes the concept of social proximity to explain how political legitimacy in micro-state contexts is constructed through dense social relations and face-to-face interactions. The results indicate that even under conditions of high migration and remittance dependence, diaspora representation may face structural limits where political legitimacy remains embedded in territorially bounded communities. Broadly, the article reorients scholarship on diaspora representation away from a predominant focus on institutional adoption toward the question of institutional sustainability, demonstrating that processes of abolition and persistent non-adoption are more convincingly theorized through social proximity than through demographic or remittance variables alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shuji Yamauchi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: