A forum to foster dialogue across disciplines on issues related to culture and development.and their implications for public action. Based on the book:

Culture and Public Action, Vijayendra Rao and Michael Walton (editors), Stanford University Press, 2004. The South Asia Edition has been published by Permanent Black.

 

Contributors (In Order of Chapters in the Book):

Amartya Sen, Arjun Appadurai, Mary Douglas, Marco Verweij, Timur Kuran, Arjo Klamer, Lourdes Arizpe, Sabina Alkire, Anita Abraham, Jean-Phiippe Platteau, Monica Das Gupta, Carol Jenkins, Fernando Calderon, Alicia Szmuckler, Simon Harragin, Shelton Davis,Vijayendra Rao, Michael Walton

 
| Conference Videos and Proceedings |
| The Book |

| Commentaries and

Further Reading |

| Web Resources |

     



 

New Comparative Institutionalism

Since the late 1970s and 1980s sociologists have increasingly used features from both modernization and dependency approaches in combination with methodological insights from European comparative historical analysis (Gerschenkron 1962; Moore 1966; Polanyi 1944). An eclectic set of studies emerged, their common ground being the concern for the critical role of institutions in the process of development. This new comparative institutionalism takes both, the structural position of states within the global political economy and domestic politics seriously, and focuses on the interplay between these two dimensions (Paige 1975; Rueschemeyer, Stephens and Stephens 1992; Stephens 1979; Waldner 1999). Scholars aim for explaining distinct patterns of development across countries and time through careful historical comparisons rather than reducing history to a unilinear process, either of dependent capital accumulation or cultural diffusion. One major explanatory framework -building on Marxist class analysis- takes the relative strength of dominant and subordinate classes and varying class alliances as a variable for explaining economic growth or political regime trajectories (Brenner 1976; Evans, Rueschemeyer and Skocpol 1985; Heller 1999; Katznelson and Zolberg 1986; O'Donnell 1973; Thompson 1963). Based on Weberian ideas, the new comparative institutionalism emphasizes the critical role of the state's capacities and its autonomy vis-a-vis civil society in impacting development outcomes (Becker 1983; Goodwin 2001; Katzenstein 1985; Mahoney 2001; Mann 1986; Skocpol 1979; Waldner 1999). Most studies in this tradition are located on the level of the nation-state. The new comparative institutionalism cautions development policy to be grounded in historical context. This approach also challenges the idea that markets alone are efficient remedies for leveraging underdevelopment and emphasizes the importance of institutional structures such as the state.

[Further Reading]

 
 

| Home || The Conference Proceedings || The Book || Commentaries ||Web Resources| Contact Us |

Copyright © 2004 Vijayendra Rao and Michael Walton