The Internal Transformation of the Autonomous Model

The Founding Principles of the 1976 Autonomy

The establishment of Azorean political autonomy in 1976 constituted one of the most profound institutional transformations in the contemporary history of the Azores—and, indeed, of Portugal itself. For the first time in nearly nine centuries, the archipelago acquired its own organs of government, endowed with democratic legitimacy and political powers intended to address the particular circumstances of island life.

Autonomy, however, did not emerge merely as an administrative solution to the problems created by geographical distance.

Its establishment was also founded upon a set of fundamental political principles intended to ensure the balanced coexistence of the nine islands within a single institutional framework.

Two principles were especially prominent. The first was the regional unity of the archipelago.

The second was the need to guarantee the harmonious development of all the islands.

Both arose directly from the archipelagic nature of the Azores.

Unlike continental territories, where geographical continuity naturally encourages economic and social integration, archipelagos are permanently exposed to the risk of territorial fragmentation. Autonomy was conceived precisely to counteract this natural tendency.

Its purpose was not simply to create regional institutions.

It was to establish political mechanisms capable of transforming nine geographically dispersed island territories into a genuine regional political community.

The Archipelago’s Polycentric Logic

Throughout long periods of Azorean history, regional development was organized around several territorial centers.

This configuration did not arise solely from political choices. It was also a consequence of geography.

The dispersal of the islands prevented the emergence of a single center comparable to those found in many continental territories.

Over time, different islands performed distinct functions in the administration, economy, military defense, transportation systems, and cultural life of the archipelago.

Although imperfect, this functional distribution produced a system that allowed for a certain degree of compensation among the natural inequalities of the islands. The system of donatary captaincies fostered the emergence of island-based elites and structures grounded in proximity; the system of general government preserved many of the same functions in the hands of those who wielded political and economic power, while creating greater symmetry among the islands; and the district model enabled groups of islands, united by shared difficulties, to develop a certain internal cohesion. An emblematic example was the establishment, within the three districts, of three civic cultural institutions designed to mitigate the adverse effects of the Administrative Code of the Adjacent Islands imposed by the Estado Novo.

The autonomy established in 1976 sought to preserve this fundamental equilibrium.

Its purpose was not to guarantee absolute equality among the islands—an impossible objective within any territorial system.

Rather, it sought to prevent the creation of institutional mechanisms that would systematically favor one part of the archipelago at the expense of the others.

The underlying principle was simple: an autonomous system created to serve nine islands could retain its legitimacy only if it were perceived as the common inheritance of all nine island communities.

Translated by Diniz Borges