Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Institutional and Policy Change: Meta-theory and Method

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Institutional Entrepreneurship and Policy Change

Part of the book series: Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy ((PEPP))

Abstract

This volume emerged from a general call for papers for a panel on institutional entrepreneurship and institutional change at the International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP) held in Milan, Italy, in the summer of 2015. We were overwhelmed by submissions to the panel and a level of interest in the topic which far exceeded our expectations. In retrospect, we should not have been surprised. Issues of institutional change continue to be of central concern to political scientists, economists, sociologists, and policy scholars alike—indeed, why and how institutions emerge, change, or are transcended over time is a core theoretical question at the centre of most social science inquiry.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    More recent renditions of the MSA approach have, according to Nowlin (2011, p. 45) shifted from a focus on ‘agenda setting to one of policy design and formulation’.

References

  • Bakir, C. (2013). Bank behaviour and resilience: The effects of structures, institutions and agents. Houndmills, Basingstoke, UK and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C. (2017). How can interactions among interdependent structures, institutions, and agents inform financial stability? What we have still to learn from global financial crisis. Policy Sciences, 50(20), 217–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakir, C., & Jarvis, D. S. L. (2017, December). Contextualising the context in policy entrepreneurship and institutional change. Policy and Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Policy Research, 36(4), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081087.2017.1393588

  • Bathelt, H., & Glückler, J. (2014). Institutional change in economic geography. Progress in Human Geography, 38(3), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132513507823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F. R., Jones, B. D., & Mortensen, P. B. (2014). Punctuated equilibrium theory: Explaining stability and change in public policy making. In P. A. Sabatier & C. M. Weible (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 25–58). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckert, J. (2009). The social order of markets. Theory and Society, 38(3), 245–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-008-9082-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D., & Howlett, M. (2016). The role and impact of the multiple-streams approach in comparative policy analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 18(3), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2016.1174410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besley, T., & Case, A. (2003). Political institutions and policy choices: Evidence from the United States. Journal of Economic Literature, 41(1), 7–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blyth, M. (2002). Great transformations: Economic ideas and institutional change in the twentieth century. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1979). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1998). Acts of resistance: Against the new myths of our time. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, P. D. (1987). The theory of institutional change. Journal of Economic Issues, 21(3), 1075–1116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, P. (2011). Understanding public policy: Theories and issues. Houndmills, Basingstoke, UK and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, P. (2015). Paul A. Sabatier, “An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein”. In M. Lodge, E. C. Page, & S. J. Balla (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of classics in public policy and administration (pp. 484–497). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, P., & Jones, M. D. (2016). Kingdon’s multiple streams approach: What is the empirical impact of this universal theory? Policy Studies Journal, 44(1), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (1998). Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy. Theory and Society, 27(3), 377–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2002). Ideas, politics and public policy. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2004). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton, NJ and Woodstock, Oxfordshire, UK: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2008). What do we know–Or not–About ideas and politics? In P. Nedergaard & J. L. Campbell (Eds.), Politics and institutions (pp. 157–176). Copenhagen, Denmark: DJØF Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2010). Institutional reproduction and change. In G. Morgan, J. L. Campbell, C. Crouch, O. K. Pedersen, & R. Whitley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative institutional analysis (pp. 87–115). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L., & Pedersen, O. K. (2001). The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis. In J. L. Campbell & O. K. Pedersen (Eds.), The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis (pp. 1–24). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, X. (2010). Networks as channels of policy diffusion: Explaining worldwide changes in capital taxation, 1998–2006. International Studies Quarterly, 54(3), 823–854. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2010.00611.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capano, G. (2009). Understanding policy change as an epistemological and theoretical problem. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 11(1), 7.31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, T., & Jarvis, D. S. L. (2015). The new politics of development: Citizens, civil society and the evolution of neoliberal development policy. Globalisations, 12(3), 281–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, T., & Jarvis, D. S. L. (2017). Disembedding autonomy: Asia after the developmental state. In T. Carroll & D. S. L. Jarvis (Eds.), Asia after the developmental state: Disembedding autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M. B. (2011). Paradigm man vs. the Bricoleur: Bricolage as an alternative vision of agency in ideational change. European Political Science Review, 3(1), 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773910000342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M. B. (2015). Institutional bricolage in times of crisis. European Political Science Review, 9(1), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773915000338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, M. B., & Schmidt, V. A. (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 

  • Clemens, E. S., & Cook, J. M. (1999). Politics and institutionalism: Explaining durability and change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colomy, P. (1998). Neofunctionalism and neoinstitutionalism: Human agency and interest in institutional change. Sociological Forum, 13(2), 265–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commons, J. R. (1959). Institutional economics: Its place in political economy (Vol. 1 & 2). Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, S. E. S., & Ostrom, E. (1995). A grammar of institutions. The American Political Science Review, 89(3), 582–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, P. A. (2002). Path dependence, its critics and the quest for ‘historical economics’. In T. Cowen & E. Crampton (Eds.), Market failure or success: The new debate. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolowitz, D., & Marsh, D. (1996). Who learns what from whom: A review of the policy transfer literature. Political Studies, 44(2), 343–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolowitz, D., & Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance, 13(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/0952-1895.00121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, Z., & Simmons, B. (2005). On waves, clusters, and diffusion: A conceptual framework. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598, 33–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/25046078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, J. F. (1981). The theory of institutional adjustment. Journal of Economic Issues, 15, 923–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1969). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. New York: Harper Colophon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory, population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–78. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of a theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1993). New rules of sociological method: A positive critique of interpretative sociologies. Oxford, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R. E. (1996). Institutions and their design. In R. E. Goodin (Ed.), The theory of institutional design (pp. 1–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A. (1986). Governing the economy: The politics of state intervention in Britain and France. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A. (2010). Historical institutionalism in rationalist and sociological perspective. In J. Mahoney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power (pp. 204–224). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2013). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, T. H., & Knott, J. H. (1999). Political institutions, public management, and policy choice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 9(1), 33–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herweg, N., Huß, C., & Zohlnhöfer, R. (2015). Straightening the three streams: Theorising extensions of the multiple streams framework. European Journal of Political Research, 54(3), 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., & Lander, M. W. (2009). Structure! agency! (and other quarrels): A meta-analysis of institutional theories of organization. The Academy of Management Journal, 52(1), 61–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. M. (2006). What are institutions? Journal of Economic Issues, XL(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M., & Cashore, B. (2009). The dependent variable problem in the study of policy change: Understanding policy change as a methodological problem. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 11(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876980802648144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M., McConnell, A., & Perl, A. (2015). Streams and stages: Reconciling Kingdon and policy process theory. European Journal of Political Research, 54(3), 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Immergut, E. M. (2006). Historical-Institutionalism in political science and the problem of change. In A. Wimmer & R. Kössler (Eds.), Understanding change: Models, methodologies, and metaphors (pp. 237–259). Houndmills, Basingstoke, UK and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, A. M. (2009). How do ideas matter? Mental models and attention in German pension politics. Comparative Political Studies, 42(2), 252–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakobi, A. P. (2012). International organisations and policy diffusion: The global norm of lifelong learning. Journal of International Relations and Development, 15(1), 31–64. https://doi.org/10.1057/jird.2010.20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, T. E., & Jorgensen, P. D. (2009). Policy knowledge, policy formulation, and change: Revisiting a foundational question. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00300.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jameson, F. (1997). Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, D. S. L. (2012). State theory and the rise of the regulatory state. In E. Araral, S. Fritzen, M. Howlett, M. Ramesh, & W. Xun (Eds.), Routledge handbook of public policy (pp. 59–72). Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, UK and New York, USA: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, D. S. L. (2017a). Exogeneity and convergence in policy formulation: Contested theories, approaches and perspectives. In M. H. A. I. Mukherjee (Ed.), Elgar handbook of policy formulation (pp. 394–409). Cheshire, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, D. S. L. (2017b, November). The OECD and the reconfiguration of the state in emerging economies: Manufacturing “regulatory capacity”. Development and Change, 48(6), 1386–1416. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12343

  • John, P. (2003). Is there life after policy streams, advocacy coalitions, and punctuations: Using evolutionary theory to explain policy change? Policy Studies Journal, 31(4), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-0072.00039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. (1966). Revolutionary change. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. (1982). MITI and the Japanese miracle: The growth of industrial policy, 1925–1975. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. D., Peterson, H. L., Pierce, J. J., Herweg, N., Bernal, A., Lamberta Raney, H., & Zahariadis, N. (2016). A river runs through it: A multiple streams meta-review. Policy Studies Journal, 44(1), 13–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, A. (2005). A critique of the use of path dependency in policy studies. Public Administration, 83(3), 553–571. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-3298.2005.00462.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. (1984a). Agendas alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. (1984b). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Glenview: Scott, Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. L. (2003). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koning, E. A. (2015). The three institutionalisms and institutional dynamics: Understanding endogenous and exogenous change. Journal of Public Policy, 36(4), 639–664. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X15000240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koppell, J. G. S. (2010). World rule: Accountability, legitimacy, and the design of global governance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. (1984). Approaches to the state: Alternative conceptions and historical dynamics. Comparative Politics, 16(2), 223–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi-Faur, D. (2005). Agents of knowledge and the convergence on a ‘new world order’: A review article. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 954–965. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500161662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, D., & Scully, M. (2007). The institutional entrepreneur as modern prince: The strategic face of power in contested fields. Organization Studies, 28(7), 971–991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (2010a). A theory of gradual institutional change. In J. Mahoney & T. Kathleen (Eds.), Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power (pp. 1–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2010b). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mambrol, N. (2016). Claude Levi Strauss’ concept of bricolage. Literary theory and Criticism notes. Retrieved from https://literariness.wordpress.com/2016/03/21/claude-levi-strauss-concept-of-bricolage/

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions. The organizational basis of politics. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J. (2009). Policy theory, policy theory everywhere: Ravings of a deranged policy scholar. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00291.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meseguer, C. (2005). Policy learning, policy diffusion, and the making of a new order. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716204272372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meseguer, C., & Gilardi, F. (2009). What is new in the study of policy diffusion? Review of International Political Economy, 16(3), 527–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290802409236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom, M., & Norman, P. (2009). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. The Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 649–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G., Campbell, J. L., Crouch, C., Pedersen, O. K., & Whitley, R. (2010). Introduction. In G. Morgan, J. L. Campbell, C. Crouch, O. K. Pedersen, & R. Whitley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative institutional analysis (pp. 1–14). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mukand, S. W., & Rodrik, D. (2016). Ideas versus interests: A unified political economy framework. Retrieved from https://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu/files/dani-rodrik/.../ideasinterestsapr10sm_dr.pdf

  • North, D. C. (1981). Structure and change in economic history. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (2005). Institutions and the performance of economies over time. In C. Ménard & M. M. Shirley (Eds.), Handbook of new institutional economics (pp. 21–30). Dordrecht and Great Britain: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nowlin, M. C. (2011). Theories of the policy process: State of the research and emerging trends. Policy Studies Journal, 39(S1), 41–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obinger, H., Schmitt, C., & Starke, P. (2013). Policy diffusion and policy transfer in comparative welfare state research. Social Policy and Administration, 47(1), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1993). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2007). Institutional rational choice: An assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 21–64). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papageorgiou, T., Katselidis, I., & Michaelides, P. G. (2013). Schumpeter, commons, and veblen on institutions. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 72(5), 1232–1254. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, T. (2002). Do political institutions shape economic policy? Econometrica, 70(3), 883–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2001). Institutional theory in political science: The ‘new institutionalism’. London and New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2012). Institutional theory in political science: The new institutionalism (3rd ed.). New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierre, J., Peters, B. G., & Stoker, G. (Eds.). (2008). Debating institutionalism. Houndmills, Basingstoke, UK and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawat, P., & Morris, J. C. (2016). Kingdon’s “streams” model at thirty: Still relevant in the 21st century? Politics & Policy, 44(4), 608–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P. W., & Greenwood, R. (1997). Integrating transaction cost and institutional theories: Toward a constrained-efficiency framework for understanding organizational design adoption. The Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 346–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. E., Caver, F. s., Meier, K. J., O’Tool, J., & Laurence, J. (2007). Explaining policy punctuations: Bureaucratization and budget change. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 140–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik, D. (2012). Ideas over interests. Project syndicate: The worlds opinion page. Retrieved from https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/ideas-over-interests?barrier=accessreg

  • Rodrik, D. (2014). When ideas trump interests: Preferences, worldviews, and policy innovations. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(1), 189–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rona-Tas, A. (2007). The three modalities of rationality and their contradictions in post-communist consumer credit markets. In J. Beckert, R. Diaz-Bone, & H. Ganssmann (Eds.), Märkte als soziale Strukturen (pp. 113–134). Frankfurt and New York: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. (1991). Toward better theories of the policy process. PS: Political Science and Politics, 24(2), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.2307/419923

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1988). An advocacy coalition model of policy change and the role of policy orientated learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21, 129–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 117–166). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R., & Myer, J. W. (1994). Institutional environments and organizations: Structural complexity and individualism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, J. W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. The American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepsle, R. (1985). Comment of why the regulators chose to deregulate. In R. Noll (Ed.), Regulatory policy and the social sciences (pp. 231–239). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2012). Policy diffusion: Seven lessons for scholars and practitioners. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 788–796. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02610.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, T. (1979). States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Starke, P., Obinger, H., & Castles, F. G. (2008). Convergence towards where: In what ways, if any, are welfare states becoming more similar? Journal of European Public Policy, 15(7), 975–1000. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760802310397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinmo, S. (2008). Historical institutionalism. In D. D. Porta & M. Keating (Eds.), Approaches and methodologies in the social sciences: A pluralist perspective (pp. 118–138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. (2001). Learning lessons, policy transfer and the international diffusion of policy ideas. CSGR Working Paper No. 69/01. Warwick: University of Warwick.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strang, D. (1991). Adding social structure to diffusion models: An event history framework. Sociological Methods and Research, 19(3), 324–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strang, D., & Soule, S. A. (1988). Diffusion in organizations and social movements: From hybrid corn to poison pills. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 265–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strebel, F., & Widmer, T. (2012). Visibility and facticity in policy diffusion: Going beyond the prevailing binarity. Policy Sciences, 42, 385–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-9161-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Institutional change in advanced political economies. In W. Streeck & K. Thelen (Eds.), Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies (pp. 1–39). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, K. (1999). Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 2(June), 369–404. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, K. (2004). How institutions evolve: The political economy of skills in Germany, Britain, the United States and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. B. (1989). The theory of structuration. In D. Geld & J. B. Thompson (Eds.), Social theory of modern societies (pp. 56–76). Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Veblen, T. (2007). The theory of the leisure class: An economic study in the evolution of institutions Oxford world’s classics (pp. electronic text.). Retrieved from https://virtual.anu.edu.au/login/?url=http://site.ebrary.com/lib/anuau/Top?id=10211797

  • Vormedal, I. (2012). States and markets in global environmental governance: The role of tipping points in international regime formation. European Journal of International Relations, 18(2), 251–275. http://ejt.sagepub.com/archive/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (A. M. Henderson & T. Parsons, Trans and T. Parsons, Ed.). New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M., Wittich, C., & Roth, G. (2013). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2006). A guide to the advocacy coalition framework. In F. Fischer, G. J. Miller, & M. S. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods (pp. 123–136). London and New York: CTC Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K. (2009). Themes and variations: Taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. The Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woo-Cumings, M. (1999). The developmental state. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahariadis, N. (2007). The multiple streams framework: Structure, limitations, prospects. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (2nd ed., pp. 65–92). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahariadis, N. (2016). Delphic oracles: Ambiguity, institutions, and multiple streams. Policy Sciences, 49(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-016-9243-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohlnhöfer, R., Herweg, N., & Rüb, F. (2015). Theoretically refining the multiple streams framework: An introduction. European Journal of Political Research, 54(3), 412–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12102

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of International Relations, Koç University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Caner Bakir

  2. Faculty of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, The Education University of Hong Kong, Ting Kok, Hong Kong

    D. S. L. Jarvis

Authors
  1. Caner Bakir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. S. L. Jarvis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of International Relations, Koç University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Caner Bakir

  2. Feculty of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Darryl S. L. Jarvis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bakir, C., Jarvis, D.S.L. (2018). Institutional and Policy Change: Meta-theory and Method. In: Bakir, C., Jarvis, D. (eds) Institutional Entrepreneurship and Policy Change. Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70350-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation