Comparative Citizenship Research: Competing Accounts Explaining Convergence and Divergence

Abstract

The empirical research on national citizenship can be classified according to the three stances of institutionalism theory (Hall and Taylor, 1996; Schmidt and Radaelli, 2004; Schmidt, 2005): historical institutionalism (Brubaker, Favell, Weil, Faist and Howard), rational choice-inspired institutionalism¹ (Joppke) and sociological institutionalism (Soysal, Checkel, Vink and Lavanex). Historical institutionalism explains the outcomes by the historical origins of institutions or the logic of ‘path-dependence’. Historical institutionalism stresses the importance of sequencing, unintended consequences and contextuality of interests. That approach has been criticized mostly for being historically deterministic, tending to emphasize structures and processes but ignoring actors, or particular single events, which also trigger a change.