Reference: Thelen, Kathleen. 1999. “HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONALISM in COMPARATIVE POLITICS.” Annual Review of Political Science 2(1): 369–404. tag: #institutionalism
- Distinctions and tangency between historical and rational choice variants of institutionalism
- Rational choice: Institutions as coordination mechanisms that generate or sustain equilibria
- Historical institutionalism: how institutions emerge from and are embedded in concrete temporal processes
Introduction
- Three institutionalism: rational choice institutionalism, historical institutionalism, sociological institutionalism.
- Border crossing:
- rational choice theorists: combines deductive ways with contextual analysis -> analytical narratives
- Historical institutionalism: firm micro foundations
- Sociological institutionalism: more expansive views of institutions, “a shared understandings that affect the way problems are perceived and solutions are sought.” (Katzenstein’s analysis on Japanese security policy, 1996:23) a set of shared understandings that affect the way problems are perceived and solutions are sought.
Red herring(apparent differences) and true issues:
-
Theoretical versus Empirical work
- The best works are concerning both theories and empirical from both sides (Luebbert 1991 on Fascism; Collier and Collier’s on Latin America)
- 确实存在差别:
- 理论层次不同:历史制度主义研究多中层理论,而理性选择制度主义多更为一般的研究。
- 形成理论的方式不同:历史制度主义多从经验困惑出发;理性选择制度主义多从理论矛盾出发。
-
Preference formation
- 误解:RC: exogenous; HI: endogenous 对于历史制度主义而言,利益和目标的定义是在制度环境中形成的,而不是外在于制度情境的;对于理性选择制度主义而言一定相反吗?
- Bates等人指出,利益最大化需要有一个文化性的知识前提;博弈论依赖着关于政治经济环境的知识。
- 大部分研究都考虑到了超越工具理性的规范性因素。
-
Micro-foundational vs. Macro-historical research
- Micro-foundation as a main distinction?
- “we must do the empirical work to make sure that the actors to whom we attribute certain strategic behaviors are in fact ‘players’ in the first place.”
- Micro-foundation as a main distinction?
-
Functional vs. historical view of institutions
- 理性选择制度主义采取功能论的视角;而历史制度主义采取历史视角。理性选择制度主义也在吸收历史性的视角。
- Zysman: rational choice institutionalists started with individuals and ask where institutions came from, whereas historical institutionalists start with institutions and ask how they affect individuals’ behaviors.
- “whereas rational choice theorists tend to view institutions in terms of their coordinating functions, historical institutionalists see institutions as the legacy of concrete historical process.”
-
Synthesis or Creative Borrowing?
- 两者没有融合,只是相互借鉴。历史制度主义更多地采纳微观基础,正视集体行动的问题。理性选择理论则更重视偏好、规范、信念的问题。
- 但差别依然存在:如何介入问题、如何形成假设、在什么层次上形成理论。
-
Equilibrium Order VS. Histrorical Process
- 作者强调这是真正存在的差别
- 理性选择认为,制度存在的目的是维持均衡,虽然他们承认均衡是有条件的。
- 历史制度主义认为制度是历史遗产的结果,因此强调时间性问题。1.多重政治过程的交错,不同政治过程之间是错位的;2. 制度的变化是不同政治过程交错造成的。
Path Dependency
-
Two ways to think about path dependency:
- from the literature on economics and technology
- “from the work of ’new’ institutional sociologists”
-
路径依赖的技术模型
- “QWERTY”: once a path is taken, then it can become “locked in”, as all relevant actors adjust their strategies to accommodate the prevailing pattern.一旦采取了一种路径,这种路径就被锁定,所有相关的行动者都通过调整他的策略来适应普遍的模式。
- 但是QWERTY的例子一方面过于contingency(很少有政策会这样面临白板一块),另一方面过于deterministic,在技术世界里不采取主流方案就会出局,在政治领域未必如此。
-
制度社会学中的路径依赖
- Specific organizations come and go, but emergent institutional forms will be isomorphic with existing ones because political actors extract causal designations from the world around them and these cause-and-effect understandings inform their approaches to new problems. 具体的组织会出现和消失,但新兴的制度形式会同现有的形式同形,因为政治行为者从周围的世界中提取因果关系,并将这些因果理解用于解决新问题的方法。
- 早期理论无法理解变化。“institutions as shared scripts”无法解释群体内部的冲突;“isomorphism"强调时间和空间的连续性,但主导规范的形成是需要斗争的。policy paradigm是发生变化的;组织内有各种有权力的行动者
-
这两种思路共同的缺陷:They have a hard time incorporating notions of conflict and power. “Dynamism in both models has to come from some exogenous shock” p.387
Path dependency in historical institutionalism
-
路径依赖的两种类型: “critical junctures and developmental pathways”(Ikenberry)
-
制度形成的关键时间点将不同国家送上了不同的发展路径。
-
制度不断地回应环境中的变化,但是受到过去发生的路径的约束。
-
有的研究国家间差别的起源(Skocpol 1979; Ertman 1997),有的强调一个国家内部路径的自我限定。
-
Critical Juncture
- 优点在于考虑时间序列,政治互动的不同模式
- 缺点在于没有指明critical juncture为什么转化为持久政治遗产
-
Developmental pathways and political feedback
- 长于考虑连续性而弱于考虑变化。
-
-
Historical institutional analyses of critical junctures
- 强调sequencing and timing,突出政治形成过程中政治和经济过程中的互动
- Collier&Collier: Shaping the political arena
- 将劳动力融入的模式差异与拉丁美洲各国党派和政权结果的差异联系起来。“‘普遍’国际事件或趋势如何在不同国家中以不同的方式转化为挑战,是由于它们与持续的国内进程的交叉和交互作用而产生的。”
- Ertman: Birth of the Leviathan
- 在持续的地缘政治竞争开始时间的差异方面,可以大大解释18世纪末洲际上国家基础设施的特征差异。
- Manow: Union formation
- 社会政策与工会形成是同时发生的,不同社会政策对不同工会形态的支持程度不同,造成了差别。
- Thelen and Kume 1999
- 类似的研究,强掉不同职业培养模式的影响。
- 这些研究都表明,因果解释内在的是时间序列的解释。“close examination of temporal sequences and processes as they unfold. They all focus on variables that capture important aspects of the interactive features of ongoing political processes, and in ways that explain important differences in regime and institutional outcomes across a range of cases.”
- 但没有指明critical juncture为什么转化为持久的政治遗产。
-
Feedback effects
see Pierson 1993 and Ikenberry 1994 for detailed summary-
两个机制
-
functional: 制度一旦形成,行动者就采取巩固制度的行动。
- Streeck 1992: 特定制度不仅反映整个制度,而且固化它。
- PA Hall and D Soskice: why certain kind of labor market arrangements tend to be associated in many advanced industrial economies with certain kinds of financial arrangement
- Esping-Adnerson:保守-法团主义福利国家鼓励参与劳动的人,不奖励不参与劳动的人,从而使得女性参与劳动的比例降低。
- Schneider, developmental state in Latin America,政府的行为加剧企业的碎片化。
- Levy 1999:法国国家试图退出对市场的监管,但由于国家太强法国没有强有力的中间行业组织,国家退出导致市场监管失败,使得法国骑虎难下。
- Vogel 1996: 政治制度环境塑造政策选项,这些政策又反过来强化这些制度。
-
Distributional effect of institutions. Ikenberry: institutions are not neutral coordinating mechanisms but in fact reflect, and also reproduce and magnify, particular patterns of power distribution in politics.制度会反映、再生产并强化特定的权力分布关系。政治安排和政策反馈积极促进某些群体的组织和授权,同时积极削弱和边缘化其他群体。……某一时刻的决策可能通过将政策引入特定轨道来限制未来的可能性。
- Skocpol 1992: protecting soldiers and mothers. 美国的政党制度组织了工人阶级的发展,同时地方民主促进了退伍军人组织的出现,但又抑制了其他组织。
- Karl 1997: oil economy and the state。石油经济产生的病态会导致这些国家更依赖石油经济。
-
Institutional Evolution and political change
- 制度配置提供的机会类型,取决于维持机会的机制。
- 制度建立有着思想和物质基础,当基础变化时制度也会变化。但破坏他们的过程可能是有差别的。
- 理解维持不同体制的不同再生产机制,也是理解为什么共同的国际趋 势经常产生如此不同的国内后果的关键,它破坏了一些国家先前的稳定模式,而对其他国家则似乎没有影响(见Locke & Thelen 1995)。