INSTITUTIONALISM
By:
Ronie S. Alamon
Institutionalism
-Is a social theory that focuses on developing a sociological view of
institutions--the way they interact and the way they affect society. It provides a
way of viewing institutions outside of the traditional views of economics by
explaining why so many businesses end up having the same organizational
structure (isomorphism) even though they evolved in different ways, and how
institutions shape the behavior of individual members.
Institutionalists - are those that think theoretically about institutions and their
impact on behavior and outcomes.
Institutions are structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation
governing the behavior of a set of individuals within a given human
collectivity.
Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence,
transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making
and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior
Institution commonly applied to customs and behavior patterns important
to a society, as well as to particular formal organizations of government
and public service
Types of institution:
∞ Marriage and Family
∞ Religion
∞ Education
∞ Scientific institutions
∞ Hospitals
∞ Legal systems
∞ Penal systems
∞ Psychiatric hospitals and Asylums
∞ Military
∞ Mass media and News media
∞ Factories and Corporations
∞ Organizations
Aspects of institutions
Institutions may be deliberately and intentionally created by people.
Manifestation of Institution:
1.Formal Social Order ( Objective Aspects)
Example: Philippine Senate , Congress,
or the Roman Catholic Church
2. Informal Social Order ( Subjective Aspects)
-once the social order reflects human psychology, culture, habits and
customs.
Sub-fields of Institutionalism
1.0 Normative institutionalism (also known as "Sociological
institutionalism" Hall and Taylor (1996))
- Normative institutionalism is sometimes seen as the "original" new
institutionalism
- A sociological interpretation of institutions, normative institutionalism
holds that a "logic of appropriateness" guides the behavior of actors within
an institution. The norms and formal rules of institutions will shape the
actions of those acting within them.
This approach can be readily contrasted with rational choice institutionalism:
rather than a series of calculated actions designed to maximize perceived
benefit, any given actor within an institution will feel to some extent
constrained and obligated by the norms and rules of the institution.
2.0 Rational choice institutionalism
Rational choice institutionalism draws heavily from rational choice
theory. Proponents of this theory argue that political actors' rational
choices are constrained ("bounded rationality"). But, individuals realize
their goals can be best achieved through institutions. In other words,
institutions are systems of rules and inducements to behavior in which
individuals attempt to maximize their own utilities.
3.0 Historical institutionalism
The 2 Elements:
1. Institutions could shape actor preferences by structuring incentives,
redistributing power, and by influencing the cultural context.
2. History is "path dependent." Choices or events early in the process can
force a path from which it becomes increasingly difficult to deviate.
Paths chosen or designed early on in the existence of an institution tend to
be followed throughout the institution's development. Institutions will have
an inherent agenda based on the pattern of development, both informal (the
way things are generally done) and formal (laws, rule, sets and institutional
interaction.)
A key concept is path dependency: the historical track of a given institution
or polity will result in almost inevitable occurrences. In some institutions,
this may be a self-perpetuating cycle: actions of one type beget further
actions of this type.
4.0 Constructivist institutionalism (discursive institutionalism)
- describe an approach which "lends insight into the role of ideas and
discourse in politics while providing a more dynamic approach to
institutional change than the older three new institutionalism".
- described also as an “ideational institutionalism”. It arises out of an
engagement with the limitations of the others, and, as a
consequence and in contrast the others, it is still very much in its
inception. It is, nonetheless already highly distinctive
(ontologically, analytically and methodologically), and it poses a
series of challenges to extant institutionalism
Institutionalist scholars hold a wide array of beliefs stemming from the
central proposition that institutions "matter" in answering the question
"what explains a particular outcome?". There are four reasons for this:
* They structure choices
* They provide incentives
* They distribute power
* They define identities and roles
Institutional Stability and Change
One of the features noted about institutions - no matter what the analytic perspective
– is that institutions do not change easily.
Though not everyone is necessarily happy with the current institutional structure, a
significant coalition is --- or else it would not, by definition, be stable. Once
stabilized, it becomes very difficult to change the rules because no one can be certain
what the outcomes of the new structure would be: This is because institutions shape
strategies, new institutional rules imply new strategies throughout the system. Change
thus implies enormous uncertainty -- it become very difficult to calculate the sum
effects of the rule changes. In short, the amount of uncertainty
implied by a new institutional structures makes actors unwilling to change the
structure
End
Thank you
