摘要:

This article is an introduction to a new and promising alternative to dominant reductionistic, utilitarian and instrumental political theories. ‘Cultural Theory’, or ‘Grid‐Group’ analysis has been developed by the British anthropologist Mary Douglas and transferred to political science by the American political scientist Aaron Wildavsky. Starting from two dimensions ‐ ‘group’ (group strength) and ‘grid’ (the number of rules that influence the individual space of action), there exist four main forms of human interaction or ways of life ‐ individualism (markets), sectarianism (egalitarism). collectivism (hierarchy) and fatalism (slavery) which can be applied to all kinds of societies, organizations and individuals. These cultures are then used to predict political action (politics), institutions (polity) and results (policies). The article shows how the theory is built up and where it comes from, and then concentrates on important logical and empirical problems that s

ISSN:0080-6757    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9477.1991.tb00407.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1991

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

The purpose of this article is to point to a number of methodological and theoretical problems connected with a theory of institutional change. Nine philosophical‐methodological questions are asked dealing with a wide range of problems rarely raised in neo‐institutional political theory. The questions concern the concept of the state, of institutions, and of language and discourse, and deal with the dialectic between individuals and institutions, choice and rationality, formal organizations and institutions as well as prescriptive versus normative analysis. A critical theory of meaning is sought in order to develop neo‐institutionalism from a research program into an actual set of descriptive and interpretative the

ISSN:0080-6757    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9477.1991.tb00408.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1991

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

The question addressed in this article is: Why are some countries more corporatist than others? It is argued that neither pure micro‐, nor pure macro‐explanations can account for the great variation in the degree of corporatism (however measured) among western countries. Instead, an institutional variant is put forward, where the structure of the state at the time of the formation of working‐class organizations is taken as the main independent variable. It has been shown that the development of collaborative or confrontational labor movements was decided by the reaction of the existing political elites to the demands from the working class in the pre‐World War I period. Where suffrage came late, and where the class system was rigid. a radical/revolutionary orientation would dominate the working‐class movement, hindering corporatist arrangements, and vice versa. The problem with this argument is that it does not fit the Swedish case. Although democracy was introduced comparatively late and although the class system was rigid, Sweden has been considered the nearly ideal‐typical case of corporatism. It is argued that the deviant Swedish case can be explained by the specific structure of the pre‐democratic Swedish state ‐ centralized, but not closed; bureaucratic and professional but not especially authoritarian; differentiated but not without central coordin

ISSN:0080-6757    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9477.1991.tb00409.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1991

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0080-6757    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9477.1991.tb00410.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1991

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0080-6757    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9477.1991.tb00411.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1991

数据来源: WILEY