Entry requirements

Political Science advanced course or equivalent education.

Learning outcomes

After completion of the course the students are expected to:

to have deepened their understanding and knowledge of institutional theories in social and political science; about commonalities and differences between the three varieties of institutionalism: historical, rational choice, and sociological; and about the point of institutionalist theories compared to other theories and how they matter and are used in empirical research

more thoroughly understand the importance of legacies for contemporary politics

be acquainted with the research done by senior scholars in comparative politics in the department

be able to apply and/or discuss the theories in a smaller study ('Final paper'), and defend and discuss the paper in a seminar with the other students

Content

The course builds on insights about political impact of institutions the students have gained from the A level course on "Citizens, the state and politics" and from the B level course on "Problems of democracy". The course discusses the commonalities and differences between the three varieties of institutionalism: historical, rational choice, and sociological. After finishing the course the students are expected to have a deeper understanding about the point of institutionalist theories, their common traits and disagreements, and how they matter and are used in empirical research.

The second overarching aim of the course is to study and discuss the importance of legacies for contemporary politics. In any given time actors are influenced, constrained, and helped by structures they have not chosen but inherited. Be it cultural values, class structures, elite patterns, organisation of political economies, or gender-based hierarchies such legacies influence politics, the nature of conflict and democratic quality.

The focus on institutions has an important backdrop in recent advances in political science. "Institutions now stand at the heart of much theorising and explanation in political science", says Paul Pierson (2004). We take institutions to mean the 'rules of the game' in politics; rules that can be formally drafted in a constitution or informally given by tradition; they can be in place and valid for a whole polity or restricted to a village or a small profession. Institutions can be changed; indeed, political conflict is often about actors' attempts to alter them. Several articles deal with institutional change.

Analysing historical legacies, the second aim of the course, we take our point of departure from the fairly recent volume edited by James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (Cambridge University Press, 2003). A book which, according to one of the comments on its back cover, has "assembled an all-star cast of comparative-historical sociologists and political scientists" within the field of comparative historical analysis. The book blends, appealingly, discussions about method, state-of-the-art, and current issues in the research fields. At least since Barrington-Moores modern classic Social Origins of Democracy and Dictatorship 'comparative historical analysis' has been an important sub-field within comparative politics. To do this kind of research well demands a lot: historical understanding and knowledge about several different countries, often implying also knowing several languages.

Legacies and institutions, sometimes closely intertwined, are first discussed more generally and theoretically and then in relation to gender, transitions to democracy in East and Central Europe, and political economy and institutions of the welfare state.

Part I: Institutional theories

In this first theme we will approach the main subject matter of the course head on: Through Paul Pierson's influential book and several often-quoted articles we will discuss the three varieties of institutionalism and the research agenda they present. Particularly we will try to focus on perhaps the least understood problem in institutional analysis: how and why do institutions change? Most of the articles are of fairly recent origin, but we will also read two slightly older to situate this discussion somewhat. We will also read four of the chapters from Mahoney and Rueschemeyer's book to relate institutional analysis to comparative historical analysis and case study analysis.

Part: II: Gender and political institutions

This theme deals with democratic quality, legacies and public policies from a gender perspective. The field of feminist comparative policy seeks to study empirically and theorise gender. How are states, public policy and gender-based hierarchies in public as well as private domains related? What driving forces do we find behind gender equal policies?

Part III: Institutions and post-communist democratisation processes

This theme concerns itself with issues of elite formation, party systems and political culture in the post-Communist region from a historical-institutionalist perspective. The Communist states were all elite-dominated, and these legacies motivate a particular focus on the political elites in these post-communist societies. In which

way the different natures of the Communist regimes have shaped the political conditions under democratic rule is focused in the study by Kitschelt et al in their tracking down of the roots of party systems in Central Europe. The paper by Li Bennich-Björkman shows not only the importance for democratic development of the Communist regimes but also how the maturity of the "second society" under Communism influenced elite quality during and after the democratic transition in the Baltic states. Both these texts are causally oriented. Collins and van Zorn show how historic legacies beyond the Communist experiences heavily shape the troubled democratisation processes in Ukraine and Central Asia by taking into consideration the importance of informal organisations such as clans and regionally based networks. Piersons chapter on the theoretical and methodological aspects regarding historical explanations aims at bringing questions about causality, their importance and the difficulties, into the open.

Part IV: Political economy and institutions of the welfare state

Political economy deals with the welfare state in industrialised economies. Although the welfare state has been put under severe pressure, the social policy in most affluent democracies centre on renegotiations and modernisation, rather than dismantling. However, different national settings, primarily the organisation of the national political economies, condition the economic performance and public policy in these countries, and, hence, affect whether, and on what terms, this restructuring succeeds. How should these differences of the political economies in the developed world be characterised? What are the effects on power and public policy?

Instruction

The course consists of lectures and seminars.

Assessment

The students are examined by means of (active participation in) seminars, written assignments, and a final written exam.

Grades will be given according to the scale Underkänt, Godkänt or Väl godkänt or, if you are a visiting student you can also get the ECTS grading.

Course level in relation to degree requirements

The course provides the students with the opportunity to practice independent evaluation and critical treatment of institutional theories by relating these theories both to empirical contexts and to theoretical discussions.