Two conclusions about Azorean autonomy: the first is the need to amend the Constitution to fix the weak and undemocratic regional government system. The second is that the Autonomous Region does not need any reform of its autonomy in relation to its legislative and development powers because we have enormous autonomous powers provided for in the Constitution and the Political Statute; there is no lack of legislative power and initiative, or even of the power to legislate with authorization on matters of state; nor is there a lack of multiple mechanisms for consultation, cooperation, and joint development.

That said, it is easy to conclude that all that is necessary is for the State, or the Autonomous Region, to promote the adjustment of the regional government system; once this is done, everything will be resolved because a model identical to that of the State will lead to the multiplication of democratic and effective verbalization, as the islanders will thus obtain guarantees similar to those of the Portuguese on the mainland to bring about the necessary changes in a procedural democracy. It should be the Region itself that develops this initiative, through the Legislative Assembly’s approval of a resolution. If it does not want to, as it does not know how to, the State will have to do it, because it is the State that has, in the first instance, responsibility towards all Portuguese citizens throughout the country. Are there other solutions? Of course there are. One is simple but difficult to implement due to the typical insular stagnation: citizens should come together to promote this debate in the media and with the State and Autonomous Region authorities.

But let’s see. Until the 18th century, the majority of the archipelago’s population was concentrated in two groups of islands: in the central group, with Pico, Faial, São Jorge, Graciosa, and Terceira, and in the western group, with Flores and Corvo, which we will call G7, with a predominance in Terceira; and in the eastern group, São Miguel and St.ª Maria, which we will call G2. Of these two groups, the G7 accounted for 62% of the Azores’ population in 1695, 59% in 1747, 58% in 1776, and 63% in 1795. From the nineteenth century onwards, with the district administrative autonomy that had existed since 1832, this pattern gradually changed, especially from 1911 onwards, with G2 at 53% and G7 at 47%. In other words, throughout most of the history of Azorean autonomy, the G7 has been predominant in terms of population; it can be concluded that Terceira had a central and “harmonious” role in the development of the islands. But more significantly, it appears that the G7 promoted a degree of proximity that made the islands of Pico, Faial, and São Jorge centers of population and development.

The idea of Luís da Silva Ribeiro, after whom the Angra do Heroísmo Library is named, and defended in 1923, advocated a model of autonomy based on local authorities. The flaw in his system was as follows: municipalities can’t govern a political region, especially through a parliament that would meet on a rotating basis; his idea of autonomy is based on a municipalist symbolism more appropriate to the district system that lasted in the archipelago from 1832 to 1974-1976, but not to a political system. However, the idea of taking advantage of municipalism is not wrong for other purposes. Note how on the mainland, the law allows for district regions, for the purposes of tourism and different dimensions; the local government system itself provides for the meeting of municipalities; and also the system of administrative areas that has been provided for in the Constitution since 1976. In other words, municipalities can organize themselves in line with the specific interests of their territories.

It is in this context that we can. It should consider a municipalist model for the economic governance of the G7 islands: this group currently comprises 100,502 inhabitants and 10 municipalities, i.e., it has the size to make the G7 an important center of development through a public, entrepreneurial, and intermunicipal institution. This G7 would have relations with the entire autonomous region, obviously including the G2 (which has a population of 142,834 individuals and 7 municipalities). A project of this kind is perfectly feasible, and its purpose would be to promote economic governance to ensure trade that sustains the economies of these seven islands, especially in their own internal markets. This is not a question of overlapping responsibilities, nor is it a question of dividing the islands. The Autonomous Region continues to exist, as do its regional policies. Alongside these, an intermunicipal public entity is created with specific purposes to ensure trade that better aligns with the seven islands’ matrix of dispersion and solidarity.

This type of solution is not uncommon in the modern world: at the municipal level, there are cities in northern Europe whose municipalities have organized themselves to have their own model of access to renewable energy, and there are cases where they not only use their own system, but also obtain dividends by selling the excess energy obtained to private and state-owned companies.

In the Azores, this type of economic governance could pose a threat to the current political autonomy; we cannot deny it. If the G7 were to achieve levels of economic excellence on an appropriate scale and a good quality of life, and with genuinely interested partners, the usefulness of the Autonomous Region would naturally be questioned one day. Since it focuses on the development of the G2 at the expense of the G7, the redeeming eagle of the Terceira phrase “Better to die free than live in peace as subjects” will surely rise from the ashes. This model could erode the extractive companies’ dictatorship in the Autonomous Region, such as EDA and SATA, which mainly serve the G2’s economy and industry. It could also lead to the division of the Region into two, with one belonging to the G2 and the other to the G7; the national models we mentioned above could also contribute to this.

In politics, almost everything is ephemeral. In fact, if political and economic institutions are inclusive, a virtuous circle emerges that makes society happy and supportive; if they are not, they become exclusive, forming a vicious circle of the extractive elite. In the Azores, this vicious circle is mainly driven by a group of politicians, some ignorant and others self-interested, who preserve their financial status quo at the expense of the people’s inertia.

Arnaldo Ourique is a specialist on the Portuguese Constitution and the Azorean Autonomy. A researcher in the fields of Politics and Society.