DOCSLIB.ORG

Review of Politics in Time, by Paul Pierson

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review of Politics in Time, by Paul Pierson book reviews 283 According to Gerring, ‘‘each case may provide a Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social single observation or multiple (within-case) observa- Analysis. By Paul Pierson. (Princeton University tions (19) ...For those familiar with the rectangular Press, 2004.) form of a dataset [i.e., a data matrix], it may be helpful doi:10.1017/S0022381607080280 to conceptualize observations as rows, variables as columns, and cases as either groups of observations or In Politics in Time, Paul Pierson has written an individual observations’’ (22). Gerring then advises the important book that is engaging, ambitious, and use of experimental or quasi-experimental methods to provocative. Its purpose is essentially threefold: to analyze variation across within-case observations. Yet advocate that political scientists situate arguments in for practitioners of case studies, the advice seems temporal perspective, to illustrate a number of ways problematic; as more and more observations are in which they might do so, and to argue that much of compared, and the inferential leverage afforded by the discipline does not presently take time seriously experimental or quasi-experimental methods is enough. The book is oriented not merely toward brought to bear, it seems less likely that one is really qualitative scholars or historical institutionalists, but conducting a case study—that is, an intensive analysis rather ‘‘those interested in the attempt to develop of one or several instances of a phenomenon (19–20). claims about the social world that can potentially The concluding chapter on process tracing, co- reach across space and time’’ (7)—effectively all authored with Craig Thomas, seems to come closest social scientists who seek to advance generalizable to shedding light on the distinctive contributions of explanations. In his effort to reach such a broad case-study research to causal inference. In process audience, Pierson engages widely with the discipline tracing, not-strictly comparable pieces of information and beyond, drawing upon theoretical insights from are combined in a way that adds up to a convincing Kenneth Arrow to Arthur Stinchcombe, exploring causal account, by rendering alternative explanations causal mechanisms from positive feedback to absorb- less plausible while showing that microevidence is ing Markov chains, and offering substantive examples consistent with theoretical claims. Process tracing from U.S. congressional committees to state building may be akin to detective work; bits of evidence about in early modern Europe. the maid, the butler, and the suspect are combined The publication of Pierson’s book in 2004 oc- to formulate or investigate a central hypothesis curred in the midst of a still-ongoing resurgence of about who committed a crime. In a different but interest in qualitative methods and temporal argu- related account, Collier, Brady, and Seawright (in ments—stimulated in no small part by Pierson’s Rethinking Social Inquiry, 2004) describe how what American Political Science Review article on path they term causal-process observations can provide a dependence published in 2000. Following an initial smoking gun that demonstrates—or rules out—a series of articles on the sources of institutional lock- particular causal hypothesis. Unfortunately, the dis- in, a second wave of scholarship by authors such as cussion of process tracing is a relatively short Kathleen Thelen and Jacob Hacker shifted the focus addendum to the core concerns of Gerring’s book. to ways in which institutions change rather than Definitional slippages are one distracting feature remain stable over time. Politics in Time, which of this book, despite the inclusion of a glossary and presents revised versions of four previously published careful attention to defining terms. At one point, for articles as well as an entirely new introduction, fifth instance, Gerring notes parenthetically, ‘‘I use the chapter, and conclusion, plays the very useful role of terms proposition, hypothesis, inference, and argu- encapsulating this evolution of the literature and also ment interchangeably’’ (22). Nevertheless, articulat- offering an attempt at synthesis. Ultimately, as ing the distinctive contributions to social science of Pierson argues in Chapter 5, change and continuity case studies has been a core challenge for qualitative must be seen as two sides of the same coin. methodologists, and together with other recent con- Politics in Time begins with a focus on institu- tributions in this area (Brady and Collier, Rethinking tional continuity via path dependence and positive Social Inquiry, 2004; George and Bennett, Case Studies feedback. Examining the mechanisms that sustain and Theory Development, 2005) Gerring’s volume stability over time in economic history, Pierson argues takes on this challenge in a spirited fashion. It will that such processes should be at least as common in provide useful and engaging reading for substantive the political realm. Reasons include the prevalence of researchers of all methodological stripes. collective action in politics; the potentially self- reinforcing accumulation of power asymmetries; the Thad Dunning, Yale University absence of a price mechanism to clearly indicate 284 book reviews optimal behavior; and the centrality of formal in- argument Pierson develops in the fourth chapter. stitutions, which have large set-up costs and generate Here, Politics in Time takes aim at ‘‘actor-centered learning effects, coordination effects, and adaptive functionalism’’—the rational-choice claim that insti- expectations. When political actors begin to travel tutions exist because farsighted, purposive, and in- down a self-reinforcing path—even one that is strumental actors benefit from them. Drawing upon eventually considered inferior to the road not tak- numerous empirical examples, Pierson lays out six en—reversal is unlikely because of the short time limitations to this perspective. Institutions may have horizons of many political actors and the obstacles to multiple or unanticipated effects, such that their change built into many political institutions. existence cannot be explained by a simple reading Having established the importance of positive of their creators’ preferences. Designers also may feedback mechanisms, the second chapter of Pier- adopt institutional forms for noninstrumental reasons, son’s book examines the closely related issue of such as diffusion or cultural specificity. Actors may timing and sequence. Here, he advocates an approach have short time horizons, creating institutions with that combines the insights and precision of rational undesirable long-term effects, or their preferences may choice models of legislative cycling with the attention change over time as institutions remain stable. Finally, to large-scale social changes that have been the political actors themselves may change; a new gener- mainstay of historical institutionalism and American ation may inherit institutions that reflect previous political development. Sequencing arguments, he actors’ preferences rather than their own. maintains, need not be ‘‘Dr. Seuss-style,’’ ad hoc In recognition of these limitations to the rational explanations in which it ‘‘just so happened’’ that one choice perspective, many historical and sociological event followed another. Rather, the best of these institutionalists have begun to articulate mechanisms arguments illustrate, often via comparison, how the of how institutions change over time. Yet in Chapter order of particular events matters crucially for the 5, Pierson argues that shifting from an assumption of eventual outcome. Examples include the self-rein- static institutions to an exclusive focus on fluidity forcing incumbency advantages enjoyed by a party involves too much of a swing of the pendulum. that initially ‘‘fills up’’ a political space, such as by Research on institutional change, which has identi- organizing the working class. Future competitors for fied mechanisms such as critical junctures, layering, this constituency will have greater difficulty than if conversion, and diffusion, places undue emphasis on they had been the first ones to occupy the same the malleability of institutions at the hands of political niche. entrepreneurs or the losers from previous rounds of The third chapter of Pierson’s book shifts the political competition, and it does not predict when focus from arguments emphasizing continuity to we should expect one type of institutional change those that focus on long-term change. Many topics versus another. Most importantly, arguments about in political science, Pierson argues, are those in which institutional change often lose sight of the sources of cause immediately precedes effect and both occur institutional stability, such as coordination problems, relatively quickly. The tendency to limit time hori- veto points, asset specificity, and positive feedback. zons of research topics in this fashion, however, Thus, Pierson concludes by proposing five distinct ignores a number of important processes, such as research agendas on processes of institutional devel- cumulative causes, threshold effects, and causal opment that seek a synthesis between arguments chains, in which the cause or the outcome unfolds about change and continuity. over a significant period of time or there is sub- As mentioned at the outset, the objective of stantial temporal separation between the two. Pierson Pierson’s book is not only to illustrate ways in which argues that the trend toward
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bringing the Welfare State Back In: the Promise (And Perils) of the New Social Welfare History
    JACOB S. HACKER Bringing the Welfare State Back In: The Promise (and Perils) of the New Social Welfare History The welfare state—the complex of policies that, in one form or another, all rich democracies have adopted to ameliorate destitution and provide valued social goods and services—is an increasingly central subject in the study of American history and politics. The past decade has unleashed a veritable tidal wave of books on the topic, including, from historians, Alice Kessler-Harris’s In Pursuit of Equity and Michael Katz’s The Price of Citi- zenship, and, from political scientists, Robert Lieberman’s Shifting the Color Line and Peter Swenson’s Capitalists Against Markets.1 Journals ranging from the American Historical Review to Political Science Quarterly (and, with less regularity, even the American Political Science Review) now rou- tinely feature analyses of U.S. social policy. And going back just a few years more, the early 1990s saw the publication of several influential works on the subject, notably Paul Pierson’s Dismantling the Welfare State? and Theda Skocpol’s Protecting Soldiers and Mothers, each of which won major book prizes in political science.2 If any moment deserves to be seen as a heady time for writing on the American welfare state, this is it. As natural as this state of affairs has come to be seen, it was not al- ways so. Writing in 1991, the historian Edward Berkowitz lamented that the American welfare state “commands little attention from today’s stu- dents, who view it as a confusing, highly technical, and dry subject that cannot compete with the exploits, often heroic, of the blacks and women who have emerged as major figures in the history classroom over the course of the last twenty years.”3 Although Berkowitz was writing of historians, his complaint applied more broadly.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    September 2020 Andrea Louise Campbell Department of Political Science Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA 02139 [email protected] Academic Positions Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Political Science Arthur and Ruth Sloan Professor of Political Science, 2015 – Faculty Affiliate, Center for Constructive Communication, MIT Media Lab, 2020 – Department head, 2015-19 Professor, 2012 - 2015 Associate Professor, 2005-12; tenured 2008 Alfred Henry and Jean Morrison Hayes Career Development Chair, 2006-09 Harvard University, Department of Government Assistant Professor, 2000-05 Lecturer, 1999-2000 Education Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley, Political Science, December 2000 M.A. University of California, Berkeley, Political Science, June 1994 A.B. Harvard University, Social Studies, magna cum laude, June 1988 Books Trapped in America’s Safety Net: One Family’s Struggle. University of Chicago Press, 2014. Featured in: Harvard Magazine; Washington Post Wonkblog; Vox; TIME Magazine; MIT Technology Review; MIT News; New Books in Political Science podcast; Faculti Media The Delegated Welfare State: Medicare, Markets, and the Governance of American Social Policy, with Kimberly J. Morgan. Oxford University Press, 2011. How Policies Make Citizens: Senior Citizen Activism and the American Welfare State. Princeton University Press, 2003. Paperback edition, 2005. Campbell, p. 2 Textbook We the People: An Introduction to American Politics, with Benjamin Ginsberg, Theodore J. Lowi, Caroline J. Tolbert, and Margaret Weir. W.W. Norton, beginning 12th edition, 2019. Articles “The Social, Political, and Economic Effects of the Affordable Care Act: Introduction to the Issue,” with Lara Shore-Sheppard. RSF: Russell Sage Foundation Journal 6; 2 (June 2020): 1- 40. “The Affordable Care Act and Mass Policy Feedbacks.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 45; 4 (August 2020): 567-80.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Science
    A 364547 Political Science: THE STATE OF -THEDISCIPLINE Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner, editors Columbia University W. W. Norton & Company American Political Science Association NEW YORK | LONDON WASHINGTON, D.C. CONTENTS Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner Preface and Acknowledgments xiii Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner American Political Science: The Discipline's State and the State of the Discipline 1 The State in an Era of Globalization Margaret Levi The State of the Study of the State 3 3 Miles Kahler The State of the State in World Politics 56 Atul Kohli State, Society, and Development 84 Jeffry Frieden and Lisa L. Martin International Political Economy: Global and Domestic Interactions 118 I ]ames E. Alt Comparative Political Economy: Credibility, Accountability, and Institutions 147 ]ames D. Morrow International Conflict: Assessing the Democratic Peace and Offense-Defense Theory 172 Stephen M. Walt The Enduring Relevance of the Realist Tradition 197 Democracy, Justice, and Their Institutions Ian Shapiro The State of Democratic Theory 235 vi | CONTENTS Jeremy Waldron Justice 266 Romand Coles Pluralization and Radical Democracy: Recent Developments in Critical Theory and Postmodernism 286 Gerald Gamm and ]ohn Huber Legislatures as Political Institutions: Beyond the Contemporary Congress 313 Barbara Geddes The Great Transformation in the Study of Politics in Developing Countries 342 Kathleen Thelen The Political Economy of Business and Labor in the Developed Democracies 371 Citizenship, Identity, and Political Participation Seyla Benhabib Political Theory and Political Membership in a Changing World 404 Kay Lehman Schlozman Citizen Participation in America: What Do We Know? Why Do We Care? 433 Nancy Burns - Gender: Public Opinion and Political Action 462 Michael C.
    [Show full text]
  • Coping with Permanent Austerity Welfare State Restructuring in Affluent Democracies Paul Pierson
    [7] Coping with Permanent Austerity Welfare State Restructuring in Affluent Democracies Paul Pierson THE welfare states of the affluent democracies now stand at the centre of political discussion and social conflict. Analysts frequently portray these conflicts as fundamental struggles between supporters and opponents of the basic principles of the post-war social contract. They often emphasize that the politics of social policy are played out against the backdrop of a transformed global economy that has undercut the social and economic foundations of the welfare state. While containing elements of truth, such portrayals distort crucial characteristics of the contemporary politics of the welfare state. Changes in the global economy are important, but it is primarily social and economic transformations occurring within affluent democracies that produce pressures on mature welfare states. At the same time, support for the welfare state remains widespread almost everywhere. In most countries, there is little sign that the basic commitments to a mixed economy of welfare face a fundamental political challenge. Nor is there much evidence of convergence towards some neoliberal orthodoxy. Yet the chapters in this volume have also stressed that welfare states are undergoing quite significant changes. In this conclusion, I argue that the contemporary politics of the welfare state take shape against a backdrop of both intense pressures for austerity and enduring popularity. In this con- text, even strong supporters of the welfare state may come to acknowledge the need for adjustment, and even severe critics may need to accept the political realities of continuing popular enthusiasm for social provision. Thus, in most of the affluent democracies, the politics of social policy centre on the renegotiation, restructuring, and modernization of the terms of the post- war social contract rather than its dismantling.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Institutionalism and the Welfare State
    Historical Institutionalism and the Welfare State Oxford Handbooks Online Historical Institutionalism and the Welfare State Julia Lynch and Martin Rhodes The Oxford Handbook of Historical Institutionalism Edited by Orfeo Fioretos, Tulia G. Falleti, and Adam Sheingate Print Publication Date: Mar 2016 Subject: Political Science, Comparative Politics, Political Institutions Online Publication Date: May 2016 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199662814.013.25 Abstract and Keywords This chapter examines how historical institutionalism has influenced the analysis of welfare state and labor market policies in the rich industrial democracies. Using Lakatos’s concept of the “scientific research program” as a heuristic, the authors explore the development and expansion of historical institutionalism as a predominant approach in welfare state research. Focusing on this tradition’s strong core of actors (academic path- and boundary-setters), rules (methodology and methods), and norms (ontological and epistemological assumptions), they strive to demarcate the terrain of HI within studies of the welfare state, and to reveal the capacity of HI in this field to underpin a robust but flexible and enduring scholarly research program. Keywords: welfare state, Lakatos, research program, historical institutionalism, ideational approaches HISTORICAL institutionalism and the analysis of welfare states (including the ancillary policy domain of the labor market) overlap significantly. More than elsewhere in Political Science and public policy, much single-country, program, and comparative analysis of the welfare state since the 1980s has taken an historical approach (Amenta 2003). Relatedly, some of the major welfare state scholars have also been major historical institutionalism theorists and proponents—most prominently, but not only, Theda Skocpol, Paul Pierson, and Kathleen Thelen.
    [Show full text]
  • Essays on the Politics of Solidarity in Multiracial America by Jae Yeon
    Essays on the Politics of Solidarity in Multiracial America by Jae Yeon Kim A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Paul Pierson, Co-chair Professor Taeku Lee, Co-chair Professor Eric Schickler Professor Irene Bloemraad Spring 2021 Essays on the Politics of Solidarity in Multiracial America Copyright 2021 by Jae Yeon Kim 1 Abstract Essays on the Politics of Solidarity in Multiracial America by Jae Yeon Kim Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Paul Pierson, Co-chair Professor Taeku Lee, Co-chair This dissertation investigates how government policies influenced U.S. minority coalition for- mation in the 1960s and 1970s. I argue that the key to explaining this puzzle lies in ethnic elites’ strategic calculations, as influenced by historical legacies, policy changes, and variations. Chapter 2 examines why American minority mobilization emphasized race so much in the 1960s and 1970s. In leveraging the Chinese immigrant communities along the U.S.–Canadian border on the West Coast, I found that what makes the U.S. unique is its immigration and segregation policies. Chapter 3 investigates why Asian and Latin American national origin groups joined forces as Asian Americans and Latinos in the 1960s and 1970s. I explain the welfare state as an underappreciated mechanism that mobilized these intra-racial coalitions. Chapter 4 examines why inter-racial coalitions were rare or short-lived in the 1960s and 1970s. I found that although racial minority groups are often described collectively as people of color, their issues varied because they faced different policy challenges.
    [Show full text]
  • Dismantling the Welfare State? After Twenty-Five Years: What Have We
    ESP0010.1177/0958928719877363Journal of European Social PolicyJensen et al. 877363research-article2019 Journal Of European Forum Social Policy Journal of European Social Policy 2019, Vol. 29(5) 681 –691 Dismantling the Welfare State? © The Author(s) 2019 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions after Twenty-five years: What DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928719877363 10.1177/0958928719877363 have we learned and what journals.sagepub.com/home/esp should we learn? Carsten Jensen Aarhus University, Denmark Georg Wenzelburger TU Kaiserslautern, Germany Reimut Zohlnhöfer Heidelberg University, Germany Abstract Dismantling the Welfare State? is a modern classic in the welfare state literature. Yet although the book is widely known, the ‘Piersonian argument’ as it is typically referred to today bears limited resemblance to the book’s highly nuanced and thought-provoking ideas. This review revisits the book and explores some of the lessons it still holds for the research community. Keywords Paul Pierson, the new politics of the welfare state, Dismantling the welfare state? Paul Pierson’s Dismantling the Welfare State? (here- Given that virtually all welfare state scholars after DWS) is undoubtedly one of the best-known probably know DWS (or shame on them!), it is strik- books in the study of the welfare state. When it was ing how little of the rich theoretical apparatus has published back in 1994, it ignited a new strand of actually been consistently adopted, let alone empiri- research on ‘the new politics of the welfare state’, cally tested. This may seem to be a weird claim one of the most fruitful and lively debates in the field in the past few decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Name: Curriculum Vitae
    Jacob (Jake) Martn Grumbach Curriculum Vitae updated March 2021 Contact 131 Gowen Hall [email protected] Information University of Washington Website Seattle, WA 98195 Research American Politics, Methods (Statistics), Public Policy, Race and Inequality, American Political Interests Development, Federalism, Political Economy Academic University of Washington Appointments Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science (2019) Aliations: Bridges Center for Labor Studies, Center for Statistics and the Social Sciences, Center for Studies in Demography and Ecology, Washington Institute for the Study of Inequality & Race Princeton University Postdoctoral Fellow, Center for the Study of Democratic Politics (20182019) Education University of California, Berkeley Ph.D., Political Science (20122018) M.A., Political Science Dissertation: Polarized Federalism: Activists, Voters, and the Resurgence of State Policy in the U.S., winner of the 2019 E.E. Schattschneider Award and the 2019 William Anderson Award Committee: Paul Pierson and Eric Schickler (co-chairs), Sarah Anzia, Sean Gailmard, Amy Lerman Fields: American Politics, Methods, Public Policy and Organization Columbia University B.A., Political Science and History, (20062010) Honors: cum laude, Departmental Honors in Political Science Book Project Collision Course: How Nationally Polarized Parties Transformed American Federalism Under contract with Princeton University Press Peer Reviewed Grumbach, Jacob M. and Charlotte Hill. ``Rock the Registration: Same Day Registration Publications Increases Turnout of Young Voters.'' 2021. Forthcoming at Journal of Politics. Riley, Alicia R., Daniel Collin, Jacob M. Grumbach, Jacqueline M. Torres, and Rita Hamad. 2021. ``Association of US State Policy Orientation with Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Longitudinal Analysis.'' Forthcoming at Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. Grumbach, Jacob M., Alexander Sahn, and Sarah Staszak.
    [Show full text]
  • Institutions and Institutionalisms
    Institutions and Institutionalisms Reading List for Comparative Politics (updated December 2015 and October 25, 2017) Peter Hall and Rosemary Taylor, “ Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms,” Political Studies, vol. XLIV (1996), pp. 936-957. Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990). Douglass C. North, Understanding the Process of Economic Change (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005), pp. 1-80. George Tsebelis, “Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism, and Multipartyism,” British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 25 (1995), pp. 289-325. Gary Cox, Making Votes Count (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 3-68, 151- 172, and 181-221. Barry Weingast “Rational Choice Institutionalism” in Ira Katznelson, Helen Milner with the APSA, eds., Political Science: State of the Discipline (New York: W.W. Norton, 2002 book), pp. 660-692. Sven Steinmo and Kathleen Thelen, “Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics” in Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 1-32. Paul Pierson and Theda Skocpol, in Ira Katznelson and Helen Milner with the APSA, eds., Political Science: State of the Discipline (New York: W.W. Norton, 2002 book), pp. 693-721. Kathleen Thelen, How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, The United States, and Japan (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 1-38, 278- 296. Paul Pierson, Politics in Time (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004), pp. 1-53 and 103-178. Shugart, Matthew Soberg and John M. Carey, Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics, pp.1-54, 273-287 (1992, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Updated September 2014
    Chloe Thurston Curriculum Vitae updated September 2014 Contact Department of Political Science (847) 467-4067 Information Northwestern University [email protected] Scott Hall http://sites.northwestern.edu/cnt993/ 601 University Place Evanston, IL 60201 Academic Northwestern University, Political Science Department Appointments Assistant Professor, 2015- College Fellow, 2014-2015 Johns Hopkins University, Political Science Department Charles and Amy Scharf Post-Doctoral Fellow, 2013-2014 Education University of California at Berkeley Ph.D. in Political Science, 2013 Dissertation Topic: Pushing the Boundaries: Citizens Groups and the Expansion of Access to Homeownership in the United States Committee: Paul Pierson (co-chair), Nick Ziegler (co-chair), Margaret Weir, Neil Fligstein M.A. in Political Science, 2008 Johns Hopkins University B.A. in Economics and Political Science, 2007 Departmental honors in political science University honors Publications 2014. "From Metaphors to Measures: Observable Indicators of Gradual Institutional Change." Journal of Public Policy 34(1): 35-62. Joint with Phil Rocco. Under Review "Policy Feedback in the Public-Private Welfare State: Citizens Advocacy Groups and the Expansion of Access to Government Homeownership Programs." Revise and resubmit. From Personal to Partisan: Abortion, Party, and Religion in the California State Assem- bly, 1967-2000. Joint with David Karol. Current Projects Pushing the Boundaries: Advocacy Groups and the Expansion of the Public-Private Wel- fare State in the United States. Book manuscript in preparation. Reconsidering Compromise: Organized Labor and the Public-Private Welfare State in Pensions and Housing. (With Mike McCarthy. In progress.) A Bargain with the Middle Class? Inequality and the Politics of Tax and Credit Policy. (With Adrienne Hosek.
    [Show full text]
  • Business and the Welfare State: Bringing Power Back in a Literature
    Business and the Welfare State: Bringing Power Back In A Literature Review Abstract How do business interest groups influence social policy-making? This paper reviews literature in sociology, political science, and history on the impact of business interests on the formulation of social policy. It identifies two relevant strands: one focusing on power, the other one on preferences. These two strands interact little. It examines key controversies in both strands and shows that central insights of each strand help to deal with problems of the other. The paper highlights two central insights: the role of strategic preferences and variation in business power. One central insight provided by the preference-centered strand regards the role of political constraints in shaping business preferences. The importance of strategic preferences and of adaptation to political constraints puts into question the view of invariant business dominance and points to variation in business power. This insight suggests that power-centered and preference-centered studies alike need to pay more attention to variation in business power and its sources. Keywords: capitalism, employers, firms, political economy, social policy, welfare state JEL classification: P16 political economy, J58 public policy, D72 political processes 1. Introduction To what extent do business interests constrain social policy? To what extent do social programs reflect the interests of business or of segments of business? Scholarly interest in the role of business interest groups in capitalist democracies has fluctuated greatly over time as have the theoretical perspectives brought to bear on this topic. Most scholars agree that business interest groups are powerful political actors and influence social policy-making.
    [Show full text]
  • JPH Volume 17 Issue 2 Cover and Front Matter
    The Pennsylvania State University Press Vol. 17 No. 2 2005 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.34.90, on 29 Sep 2021 at 05:46:39, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898030600001299 ticles Trading Civil Liberties orld War II Internment EDITOR Donald T. Critchlow Saint Louis University a Barbara), “Clutching to ASSOCIATE EDITOR/BOOK REVIEW EDITOR son, The Great Depression, David B. Robertson University of Missouri, St. Louis w, Social MANAGING EDITOR olitics and Securities Don Reed COPYEDITOR Cherene Holland EDITORIAL BOARD teenth-Century Brian Balogh (History) Suzanne Mettler (Political Science) University of Virginia Syracuse University Richard Bensel (Government) James Mohr (History) Cornell University University of Oregon Gareth Davies (Political Science) James Morone (Political Science) University of Lancaster, U.K. Brown University Jane S. DeHart (History) Ann S. Orloff (Sociology) University of California, Santa Barbara Northwestern University Robin Einhorn (History) Paul Pierson (Political Science) University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley Daniel M. Fox (Health Policy) Daniel T. Rodgers (History) Millbank Memorial Fund Princeton University Otis Graham (History) Byron E. Shafer (Political Science) University of North Carolina, University of Wisconsin, Madison Wilmington Theda Skocpol (Sociology and Political Richard R. John (History) Science) University of Illinois, Chicago Harvard University Ira Katznelson (Political Science) David Vogel (Business) Columbia University University of California, Berkeley Alice Kessler-Harris (History) Julian Zelizer (History) Columbia University Boston University Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.34.90, on 29 Sep 2021 at 05:46:39, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
    [Show full text]