Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Poststructuralist discourse theory as an independent paradigm for studying institutions: Towards a new definition of ‘discursive construction’ in institutional analysis

  • Article
  • Published:
Contemporary Political Theory Aims and scope

Abstract

Poststructuralist discourse theory (DT) is enjoying increasing recognition for its potential to contribute to the study of institutional change and continuity. Yet the most fruitful approach to realizing this potential has hitherto not been found. The main proposition so far has been to operationalize DT’s insights and concepts by adopting them into the framework of discursive institutionalism (DI). However, an ongoing debate about the compatibility of the ontologies underlying DT and DI has cast doubts over whether such a combination is theoretically feasible. The critical literature review in the first part of this article indeed finds insurmountable ontological differences between the discourse-theoretical and the discursive-institutionalist traditions, as their clashing notions of what is understood as a ‘discourse’ result in diverging views on power, agency, and subjectivity. Instead of merging DT into DI, I suggest to empower the former as a self-sufficient paradigm for institutional analysis. To achieve this, the second part of this article re-articulates the ‘logics framework’ proposed by Jason Glynos and David Howarth (2007) into a middle-range theory for the study of institutionalization and politicization in a discourse-theoretical fashion. The purpose of this re-articulation is to dispel various arguments against the viability of an autonomous poststructuralist approach to institutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bacchi, C. and Rönnblom, M. (2014) Feminist discursive institutionalism—A poststructural alternative. Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 22(3): 170–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. (2011) Do we really need a new ‘constructivist institutionalism’ to explain institutional change? British Journal of Political Science 41(4): 883–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. (2012) Where are the institutions? The limits of Vivien Schmidt’s constructivism. British Journal of Political Science 42(3): 714–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J., Laclau, E. and Žižek, S. (2000) Contingency, Hegemony, Universality: Contemporary Dialogues on the Left. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M. (2011) Ideas are not as stable as political scientists want them to be: A theory of incremental ideational change. Political Studies 59(3): 596–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M. (2012) The relevance of an incremental approach to ideational change: A rejoinder to Liam Stanley. Political Studies 60 (3): 720–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M. (2015) Conceptualising ideational novelty: A relational approach. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 17(2): 284–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M. and Schmidt, V. (2016) Power through, over and in ideas: Conceptualizing ideational power in discursive institutionalism. Journal of European Public Policy 23(3): 318–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carta, C. and Morin, J.-F. (2014) EU Foreign Policy Through the Lens of Discourse Analysis: Making Sense of Diversity. Burlington: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devenney, M., Howarth, D., Norval, A., Stavrakakis, Y., Marchart, O., Biglieri, P., et al. (2016) Ernesto Laclau. Contemporary Political Theory 15(3): 304–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1979) Central Problems in Social Theory. Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glynos, J. and Howarth, D. (2007) Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1979) What is Universal Pragmatics?’ Communication and the Evolution of Society. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1987) The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1995) Reconciliation through the public use of reason: remarks on John Rawls’s political liberalism. The Journal of Philosophy 92(3): 109–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2000) On the Pragmatics of Communication. Cambridge: MIT press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, A. (2008a) Laclauian discourse theory and the problems of institutions. Paper Presented at Second Global International Studies Conference. Ljubljana.

  • Hansen, A. (2008b) The ontological primacy of the political? Some critical remarks. Paper Presented at World Conference in Ideology and Discourse Analysis. Roskilde.

  • Hay, C. (2002) Political Analysis: A Critical Introduction. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C. (2005) Making Hay… or clutching at ontological straws? Notes on realism, “As-if-Realism” and actualism. Politics 25(1): 951–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C. (2017) The interdependence of intra-and inter-subjectivity in constructivist institutionalism. Critical Review 29(2): 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, D. (2000) Discourse. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, D. (2010) Power, discourse, and policy: articulating a hegemony approach to critical policy studies. Critical Policy Studies 3(3–4): 309–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E. (1990) New Reflections on the Revolution Our Time. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E. (1995) Emancipations. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E. (2005) On Populist Reason. New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E. and Bhaskar, R. (1998) Discourse theory vs critical realism. Alethia 1(2): 9–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C. (1985/2001) Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.

  • Larsson, O. (2015) Using post-structuralism to explore the full impact of ideas on politics. Critical Review 27(2): 174–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lievens, M. (2012) Ideology critique and the political: Towards a Schmittian perspective on ideology. Contemporary Political Theory 11(4): 381–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchart, O. (2014) Institution and dislocation: philosophical roots of Laclau’s discourse theory of space and antagonism. Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 15(3): 271–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marttila, T. (2015) Post-foundational Discourse Analysis: From Political Difference to Empirical Research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, D. (2013) ‘Tissue on the Bones’: Towards the development of a post-structuralist institutionalism. Politics 33(2): 112–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (2005) On the Political. Brighton: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, A. (2006) Ernesto Laclau and the logic of ‘the political’. Philosophy & Social Criticism 32(1): 111–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panizza, F. and Miorelli, R. (2013) Taking discourse seriously: Discursive institutionalism and post- structuralist discourse theory. Political Studies 61(2): 301–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, M. and Philips, L. (2002) Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2008) Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Politcal Science 11: 303–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2010) Taking ideas and discourse seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. European Political Science Review 2(1): 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2011) Reconciling ideas and institutions through discursive institutionalism. In: D. Béland and R. Cox (eds.) Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research (pp. 47–64). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2012) Discursive institutionalism. Scope, dynamics, and philosophical underpinnings. In: F. Fischer and H. Gottweis (eds.) The Argumentative Turn Revisited: Public Policy as Communicative Practice (pp. 85–113). Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2014) Speaking to the markets or to the people? A discursive institutionalist analysis of the EU’s sovereign debt crisis. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 16(1): 188–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2016) EU Leaders’ ideas and discourse in the eurozone crisis: A discursive institutionalist analysis. In: C. Carta and J.-F. Morin (eds.) EU Foreign Policy Through the Lens of Discourse Analysis: Making Sense of Diversity (pp. 245–264). Burlington: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2017) Theorizing ideas and discourse in political science: Intersubjectivity, neo-institutionalisms, and the power of ideas. Critical Review 29(2): 248–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. and Radaelli, C. (2004) Policy change and discourse in Europe: Conceptual and methodological issues. West European Politics 27(2): 183–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sim, S. (2013) Post-Marxism: An Intellectual History. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, E. and Torfing, J. (2007) Theoretical approaches to governance network failure. In: E. Sørensen and J. Torfing (eds.) Theories of Democratic Network Governance (pp. 95–110). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, L. (2012) The difference between an analytical framework and a theoretical claim: A reply to Martin Carstensen. Political Studies 60(2): 474–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zienkowski, J. (2016) Articulations of Self and Politics in Activist Discourse: A Discourse Analysis of Critical Subjectivities in Minority Debates. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for EU Studies, Ghent University Korte Meer 1, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Thomas Jacobs

Authors
  1. Thomas Jacobs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Jacobs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jacobs, T. Poststructuralist discourse theory as an independent paradigm for studying institutions: Towards a new definition of ‘discursive construction’ in institutional analysis. Contemp Polit Theory 18, 379–401 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-0279-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-0279-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation