Preliminary Note. Under this title and theme, this brief essay seeks to understand the problem from the perspective of territorial centralization, institutional fragility, and the need to reform the system of regional government.
The idea for this essay arose from observing a certain degree of regional parochialism that permeates the media, institutions, and political discourse. It is written in the hope of improving this emotionally charged rhetoric, with the conviction that discussions of public affairs produce positive results only when conducted in an elevated spirit, always with the aim of addressing present difficulties, debating possible solutions, and, ultimately, adopting measures capable of resolving the problem.
In the Azores, each island carries with it a historical, cultural, and human legacy that has contributed to the construction of the archipelago’s collective identity. Angra do Heroísmo, the first truly Atlantic-oriented European city and the stage for decisive moments in Portuguese history, symbolizes the archipelago’s oceanic vocation. Terceira embodies a unique historical and cultural spirit, as attested by figures such as António Cordeiro and Vitorino Nemésio. São Miguel distinguished itself through its economic, intellectual, and political vitality, giving rise to towering figures in poetry, politics, and contemporary autonomy, such as Natália Correia and Mota Amaral. Faial established itself as the Atlantic’s international crossroads through its harbor, submarine cable station, and the cosmopolitan character of Horta. Pico projected the Azores onto the world stage through the epic of whaling and its vineyard landscape, recognized as a World Heritage Site. São Jorge developed its own identity of resilience and adaptation to the demands of its singular geography. Graciosa stood out for its social stability and the richness of its natural heritage. Santa Maria played a pioneering role in the settlement of the archipelago and assumed strategic importance in transatlantic aviation. Flores and Corvo are remarkable examples of humanity’s capacity to create community, culture, and prosperity under conditions of extreme isolation. Thus, each island has added its own distinctive dimension to the making of the Azores.
This diversity constitutes one of the greatest strengths of Azorean autonomy and represents a living museum of Portuguese culture. Pride in the history of each island should not be mistaken for insular rivalry, for recognizing the merits of one does not diminish the merits of another. On the contrary, Azorean identity derives precisely from the convergence of these different historical, cultural, and human experiences. Love for one’s native island, its memory, and its achievements is a legitimate expression of belonging and citizenship. What weakens autonomy is not this healthy pride, but rather the parochialism that transforms differences into antagonisms and cooperation into competition devoid of developmental purpose. Autonomy was born to unite what geography had separated; therefore, giving balanced recognition to the contribution of every island is not only a matter of historical justice but also an essential condition for political cohesion and for the future sustainability of the Azorean autonomous project.
Criticism of centralization is not criticism of any particular island; it is a defense of balance among all the islands, each according to its own place and role. This distinction is fundamental to the quality of democracy and to the well-being of the island communities.
From this constructive perspective, we shall examine ideas concerning the concepts of region and autonomy; its constitutional fragility; the substantive limits of constitutional revision; the constitutional protection and political vulnerability of Azorean autonomy; the internal transformation of the autonomous model; the founding principles established in 1976; the polycentric logic of the archipelago; balanced development; the statutory reforms of 1998 and 2009; and the institutional consequences arising from those changes.
We shall also consider concrete cases illustrating these difficulties, as well as questions of history, identity, and political legitimacy; the historical formation of the archipelago; district autonomy; Azorean liberalism; the question of regional unity; modern autonomism and its contemporary historical perceptions; the shortcomings of the autonomous system of government; functional concentration and its institutional effects; the need for reform; possible alternatives; and, finally, a synthesis of the findings together with future perspectives for Azorean autonomy.
The Erosion of Autonomy
Arnaldo Ourique