It is, indeed, a much wider margin for the No than the last time a proposal for secession was voted on in a Western country, in Canada in 1995. In that referendum, just 50.5 percent of Quebecers voted No, compared to 49.5 percent who voted Yes.

At the time, many Canadians thought that the country’s demolition had only been deferred, not averted. It was, after all, the second referendum on Quebec’s independence, and it was a lot closer to a Yes than the first one in 1980 (60 percent No, 40 percent Yes). 

Third time lucky, muttered the separatists of the Parti Quebecois.

But they turned out to be wrong. Almost two decades later there has been no third referendum in Quebec, nor is there any on the horizon. But Quebec paid a high price for the mere POSSIBILITY of another referendum, and so might Scotland?

What befell Quebec was a low-level depression that lasted for decades as investors avoided a place whose political future was so uncertain, and existing businesses pulled out.

How might Scotland avoid that fate? The only way, really, is for “Devo Max” to work so well that nobody talks about independence any more. That will be more than a little tricky.

“Devo Max” – maximum devolution of power from London to Edinburgh – would leave little else but defence and foreign affairs to the UK parliament in London. Everything else would be decided in Scotland.

So what’s the problem? Scotland was already more than halfway there before the independence referendum. 

In the panicky last days before the vote, when it briefly looked like the Yes might squeak through to a narrow victory, all three major British parties promised to deliver the other half as well.

But it will be very hard for them to keep their promises, which include placing what amounts to a proposal for a new British constitution before the Westminster parliament by next March. 

Even more difficult is the fact that Scotland cannot all be given all these powers while the other parts of the United Kingdom – Wales, Northern Ireland, and even the various regions of England – stay just the same. 

There must be at least some more devolution for them too, but that debate has barely started.

So what are the odds that Scotland will escape the “planning blight” of a long period during which a second referendum lurks in the shadows and the economic damage accumulates? Not very good.   

Gwynne Dyer is an independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.