Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change

Institutional approaches to explaining political phenomena suffer from three common limitations: reductionism, reliance on exogenous factors, and excessive emphasis on order and structure. Ideational approaches to political explanation, while often more sensitive to change and agency, largely exhibi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American political science review 2002-12, Vol.96 (4), p.697-712
1. Verfasser: Lieberman, Robert C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 712
container_issue 4
container_start_page 697
container_title The American political science review
container_volume 96
creator Lieberman, Robert C.
description Institutional approaches to explaining political phenomena suffer from three common limitations: reductionism, reliance on exogenous factors, and excessive emphasis on order and structure. Ideational approaches to political explanation, while often more sensitive to change and agency, largely exhibit the same shortcomings. In particular, both perspectives share an emphasis on discerning and explaining patterns of ordered regularity in politics, making it hard to explain important episodes of political change. Relaxing this emphasis on order and viewing politics as situated in multiple and not necessarily equilibrated order suggests a way of synthesizing institutional and ideational approaches and developing more convincing accounts of political change. In this view, change arises out of “friction” among mismatched institutional and ideational patterns. An account of American civil rights policy in the 1960s and 1970s, which is not amenable to either straightforward institutional or ideational explanation, demonstrates the advantages of the approach.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S0003055402000394
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60641486</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0003055402000394</cupid><jstor_id>3117505</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3117505</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-a0115326978318ddcdab9a2768d96425eda5e7423d04fcea1deb607beac7f0783</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkF9LwzAUxYMoOKcfQPBh-OCT1ZvmX-ubjDkHwhybCL6ErMlmZtfOpIX57c3omKKIT8nN-Z3LyUHoFMMVBiyuxwBAgDEK8eaW0j3UwoyIiKWU7KPW5jHa6IfoyPtFGAFD0kK9gTbKX3YGha9sVVe2LMKkCt15LHNb2UzlnaHTxt10eutVrmxhi_k3rfuqirk5RgczlXtzsj3b6OmuN-neRw_D_qB7-xBlLIEqUoBDppinIiE40TrTapqqWPBEp5zGzGjFjKAx0UBnmVFYmykHMTUqEzMIpja6aPauXPleG1_JpfWZyXNVmLL2kgOnmCb8X5AkNLRGRQDPf4CLsnZF-ISMMaUxEEwDhBsoc6X3zszkytmlch8Sg9zUL3_VHzxnjWfhq9LtDARjwYAFOWpk6yuz3snKvUkuiGCS90cyHZFJ_ELG8jnwZBtBLafO6rn5Cvp3iE9aR50p</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>214420314</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Lieberman, Robert C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lieberman, Robert C.</creatorcontrib><description>Institutional approaches to explaining political phenomena suffer from three common limitations: reductionism, reliance on exogenous factors, and excessive emphasis on order and structure. Ideational approaches to political explanation, while often more sensitive to change and agency, largely exhibit the same shortcomings. In particular, both perspectives share an emphasis on discerning and explaining patterns of ordered regularity in politics, making it hard to explain important episodes of political change. Relaxing this emphasis on order and viewing politics as situated in multiple and not necessarily equilibrated order suggests a way of synthesizing institutional and ideational approaches and developing more convincing accounts of political change. In this view, change arises out of “friction” among mismatched institutional and ideational patterns. An account of American civil rights policy in the 1960s and 1970s, which is not amenable to either straightforward institutional or ideational explanation, demonstrates the advantages of the approach.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-0554</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-5943</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0003055402000394</identifier><identifier>CODEN: APORBP</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Affirmative action ; Agency ; Beliefs ; Civil rights ; Civil Rights Legislation ; Civil rights movements ; Employment discrimination ; Equal rights ; Ideology ; Institutionalism ; Institutions ; Liberalism ; Methodology (Philosophical) ; Policy Making ; Political Change ; Political ideas ; Political ideologies ; Political institutions ; Political order ; Political parties ; Political power ; Political revolutions ; Political science ; Political systems ; Politics ; Raw materials ; Reductionism ; Social policy ; Social sciences ; U.S.A ; Variables</subject><ispartof>The American political science review, 2002-12, Vol.96 (4), p.697-712</ispartof><rights>2002 by the American Political Science Association</rights><rights>Copyright 2002 American Political Science Association</rights><rights>Copyright Cambridge University Press, Publishing Division Dec 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-a0115326978318ddcdab9a2768d96425eda5e7423d04fcea1deb607beac7f0783</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3117505$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055402000394/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,803,12845,27924,27925,55628,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lieberman, Robert C.</creatorcontrib><title>Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change</title><title>The American political science review</title><addtitle>Am Polit Sci Rev</addtitle><description>Institutional approaches to explaining political phenomena suffer from three common limitations: reductionism, reliance on exogenous factors, and excessive emphasis on order and structure. Ideational approaches to political explanation, while often more sensitive to change and agency, largely exhibit the same shortcomings. In particular, both perspectives share an emphasis on discerning and explaining patterns of ordered regularity in politics, making it hard to explain important episodes of political change. Relaxing this emphasis on order and viewing politics as situated in multiple and not necessarily equilibrated order suggests a way of synthesizing institutional and ideational approaches and developing more convincing accounts of political change. In this view, change arises out of “friction” among mismatched institutional and ideational patterns. An account of American civil rights policy in the 1960s and 1970s, which is not amenable to either straightforward institutional or ideational explanation, demonstrates the advantages of the approach.</description><subject>Affirmative action</subject><subject>Agency</subject><subject>Beliefs</subject><subject>Civil rights</subject><subject>Civil Rights Legislation</subject><subject>Civil rights movements</subject><subject>Employment discrimination</subject><subject>Equal rights</subject><subject>Ideology</subject><subject>Institutionalism</subject><subject>Institutions</subject><subject>Liberalism</subject><subject>Methodology (Philosophical)</subject><subject>Policy Making</subject><subject>Political Change</subject><subject>Political ideas</subject><subject>Political ideologies</subject><subject>Political institutions</subject><subject>Political order</subject><subject>Political parties</subject><subject>Political power</subject><subject>Political revolutions</subject><subject>Political science</subject><subject>Political systems</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Raw materials</subject><subject>Reductionism</subject><subject>Social policy</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>Variables</subject><issn>0003-0554</issn><issn>1537-5943</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkF9LwzAUxYMoOKcfQPBh-OCT1ZvmX-ubjDkHwhybCL6ErMlmZtfOpIX57c3omKKIT8nN-Z3LyUHoFMMVBiyuxwBAgDEK8eaW0j3UwoyIiKWU7KPW5jHa6IfoyPtFGAFD0kK9gTbKX3YGha9sVVe2LMKkCt15LHNb2UzlnaHTxt10eutVrmxhi_k3rfuqirk5RgczlXtzsj3b6OmuN-neRw_D_qB7-xBlLIEqUoBDppinIiE40TrTapqqWPBEp5zGzGjFjKAx0UBnmVFYmykHMTUqEzMIpja6aPauXPleG1_JpfWZyXNVmLL2kgOnmCb8X5AkNLRGRQDPf4CLsnZF-ISMMaUxEEwDhBsoc6X3zszkytmlch8Sg9zUL3_VHzxnjWfhq9LtDARjwYAFOWpk6yuz3snKvUkuiGCS90cyHZFJ_ELG8jnwZBtBLafO6rn5Cvp3iE9aR50p</recordid><startdate>20021201</startdate><enddate>20021201</enddate><creator>Lieberman, Robert C.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20021201</creationdate><title>Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change</title><author>Lieberman, Robert C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-a0115326978318ddcdab9a2768d96425eda5e7423d04fcea1deb607beac7f0783</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Affirmative action</topic><topic>Agency</topic><topic>Beliefs</topic><topic>Civil rights</topic><topic>Civil Rights Legislation</topic><topic>Civil rights movements</topic><topic>Employment discrimination</topic><topic>Equal rights</topic><topic>Ideology</topic><topic>Institutionalism</topic><topic>Institutions</topic><topic>Liberalism</topic><topic>Methodology (Philosophical)</topic><topic>Policy Making</topic><topic>Political Change</topic><topic>Political ideas</topic><topic>Political ideologies</topic><topic>Political institutions</topic><topic>Political order</topic><topic>Political parties</topic><topic>Political power</topic><topic>Political revolutions</topic><topic>Political science</topic><topic>Political systems</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Raw materials</topic><topic>Reductionism</topic><topic>Social policy</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>Variables</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lieberman, Robert C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>The American political science review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lieberman, Robert C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change</atitle><jtitle>The American political science review</jtitle><addtitle>Am Polit Sci Rev</addtitle><date>2002-12-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>96</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>697</spage><epage>712</epage><pages>697-712</pages><issn>0003-0554</issn><eissn>1537-5943</eissn><coden>APORBP</coden><abstract>Institutional approaches to explaining political phenomena suffer from three common limitations: reductionism, reliance on exogenous factors, and excessive emphasis on order and structure. Ideational approaches to political explanation, while often more sensitive to change and agency, largely exhibit the same shortcomings. In particular, both perspectives share an emphasis on discerning and explaining patterns of ordered regularity in politics, making it hard to explain important episodes of political change. Relaxing this emphasis on order and viewing politics as situated in multiple and not necessarily equilibrated order suggests a way of synthesizing institutional and ideational approaches and developing more convincing accounts of political change. In this view, change arises out of “friction” among mismatched institutional and ideational patterns. An account of American civil rights policy in the 1960s and 1970s, which is not amenable to either straightforward institutional or ideational explanation, demonstrates the advantages of the approach.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0003055402000394</doi><tpages>16</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-0554
ispartof The American political science review, 2002-12, Vol.96 (4), p.697-712
issn 0003-0554
1537-5943
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60641486
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Affirmative action
Agency
Beliefs
Civil rights
Civil Rights Legislation
Civil rights movements
Employment discrimination
Equal rights
Ideology
Institutionalism
Institutions
Liberalism
Methodology (Philosophical)
Policy Making
Political Change
Political ideas
Political ideologies
Political institutions
Political order
Political parties
Political power
Political revolutions
Political science
Political systems
Politics
Raw materials
Reductionism
Social policy
Social sciences
U.S.A
Variables
title Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T04%3A37%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ideas,%20Institutions,%20and%20Political%20Order:%20Explaining%20Political%20Change&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20political%20science%20review&rft.au=Lieberman,%20Robert%20C.&rft.date=2002-12-01&rft.volume=96&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=697&rft.epage=712&rft.pages=697-712&rft.issn=0003-0554&rft.eissn=1537-5943&rft.coden=APORBP&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0003055402000394&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3117505%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=214420314&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0003055402000394&rft_jstor_id=3117505&rfr_iscdi=true