Advertisement

Studies in Comparative International Development

, Volume 38, Issue 4, pp 109–131 | Cite as

Understanding institutional change: Fast-moving and slow-moving institutions

  • Gérard Roland
Articles

Abstract

This article proposes a classification of ‘slow-moving” and “fast-moving” institutions, and discusses the potential results of their interaction. A prime example of a slow-moving institution is culture, including values, beliefs, and social norms, which tend to change gradually. Political institutions are typically fast-moving institutions; exemplifying the nature of this category, political institutions do not necessarily change often but can change very quickly—sometimes nearly overnight. The interaction between slow-moving and fast-moving institutions can shed light on institutional change (why, how, and when it occurs), and evinces both the difficulty of transplanting institutions into different cultural contexts and the advantages of diverse institutional “blueprints” for efficient growth and development.

Keywords

Social Norm Institutional Change Political Institution Comparative International Development Policy Dialogue 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Acemoglu, D. 2002. “Why Not A Political, Coase Theorem? Social Conflict, Commitment and Politics.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. w9377.Google Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, D., S. Johnson, and J. Robinson. 2001. “Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation.”American Economic Review 91: 1369–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acemoglu, D. and J. Robinson. 2000. “Why Did the West Extend the Franchise? Democracy, Inequality, and Growth in Historical Perspective.”Quarterly Journal of Economics 115: 1167–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Acemoglu, D. and J. Robinson. 2001. “A Theory of Political Transitions.”American Economic Review 91: 938–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Acemoglu, D. and J. Robinson. 2002. “Economic Backwardness in Political Perspective.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. w8831.Google Scholar
  6. Acemoglu, D. and J. Robinson.Political Origins of Democracy and Dictatorship. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  7. Aoki, M. 2001.Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Baron, D. 1998. “Comparative Dynamics of Parliamentary Government.”American Political Science Review 92: 593–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berglöf, E. 1990. “Capital Structure as a Mechanism of, Control: A Comparison of Financial Systems.” InThe Firm as a Nexus of Treaties. Masahiko Aoki, Bo Gustavsson, and Oliver Williamson. eds. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Cai, H. and D. Treisman. “State Corroding Federalism: Interjurisdictional Competition and the Weakening of Central Authority.” UCLA Economics Online Paper No. 251. Los Angeles: University of California (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  11. Che, J. and Y. Qian. 1998. “Insecure Property Rights and Government Ownership of Firms.”Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 2: 467–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dewatripont, M. and G. Roland. 1995. “The Design of Reform Packages under Uncertainty.”American Economic Review 85: 1207–23.Google Scholar
  13. Diamond, J. 1998.Guns, Germs and Steel. New York: Norton Publishing Press.Google Scholar
  14. Diermeier, D., H. Eraslan, and A. Merlo. In press. “A Structural Model of Government Formation”.Econometrica.Google Scholar
  15. Djankov, S. E. Glaeser, R. La Porta, F. Lopez-de-Silanes, and, A. Shleifer. 2003. “The New Comparative Economics.”Journal of Comparative Economics (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  16. Elster, J. 1982. “Marxism, Functionalism and Game Theory: The Case for Methodological Individualism.”Theory and Society 11, 4: 453–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Evans, P., 1989. “Predatory, Developmental and Other Apparatuses: A Comparative Political Economy Perspective on the Third World State.”Sociological Forum 4, 4: 561–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Finer, S.E. 2001.A History of Government from the Earliest Times. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Gerschenkron, A. 1962.Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  20. Greif, A. 1993. “Contract Enforceability and Economic Institutions in Early Trade: The Maghribi Traders’ Coalition.”American Economic Review 83, 3: 525–48.Google Scholar
  21. — 1994. “Cultural Beliefs and the Organization of Society: A Historical and Theoretical Reflection on Collectivist and Individualist Societies.”Journal of Political Economy 102, 5: 912–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hough, J. 1988.Opening up the Soviet Economy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kornai, J. 1995.Highways and Byways. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. — 1980.Economics of Shortage. Amsterdam: North-Holland Press.Google Scholar
  25. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1998a. “Law and Finance.”Journal of Political Economy 106: 1113–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1998b. “Legal Determinants of External Finance.”Journal of Finance 52: 1131–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1999. “Corporate Ownership around the World.”Journal of Finance 54: 471–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 2000. “Agency Problems and Dividend Policies around the World.”Journal of Finance 55: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lizzeri, A. and N. Persico. 2001. “The Provision of Public Goods under Alternative Electoral Incentives.”American Economic Review 91, 1: 225–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mayer, C. 1987. “The Assessment: Financial Systems and Corporate Investment.”Oxford Review of Economic Policy 3, 4: i-xvi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Milesi-Ferretti, G-MA., R. Perotti, and Ma. Rostagno. 2002. “Electoral Systems and the Composition of Public Spending.”Quarterly Journal of Economics 117: 609–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Naughton, B. 1995.Growing Out of the Plan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. North, D. 1990.Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. North, D. and B. Weingast 1989. “Constitutions and Commitment: Evolutions of Institutions Governing Public Choice.”Journal of Economic History 49: 803–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Olson, M. 1971.The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Olson, M. 1982.The Rise and Decline of Nations. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Persson, T. and G. Tabellini. 1999. “The Size and Scope of Government: Comparative Politics with Rational Politicians.”European Economic, Review, Marshall Lecture 699–736.Google Scholar
  38. Persson, T. Roland, and G. Tabellini 1997. “Separation of Powers and Political Accountability.”Quarterly Journal of Economics 112: 310–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Persson, T., G. Roland, and G. Tabellini. 2000. “Comparative Politics and Public Finance.”Journal of Political Economy 108, 6: 1121–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Persson, T., G. Roland, and G. Tabellini, 2003. “How do Electoral Rules Shape Party Structure, Forms of Government and Economic Policy?” PIER Conference on Political Economics working paper.Google Scholar
  41. Przeworski, A., M. Alvarez, J. Cheibud, and F. Limongi. 2000.Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World. 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Qian, Y. 2002. “How Reform Worked in China.” William Davidson Institute Working Paper No. 473. Ann Arbor, MI: William Davidson Institute.Google Scholar
  43. Qian, Y., G. Roland, and C. Xu 1999. “Coordinating Changes in M-form and U-form Organizations.” William Davidson Institute Working Paper No. 284. Ann Arbor, MI: William, Davidson Institute.Google Scholar
  44. Qian, Y. and C. Xu 1993. “Why China’s Economic Reforms Differ: The M-Form Hierarchy and Entry/Expansion of the Non-State Sector.”Economics of Transition 1, 2: 135–170.Google Scholar
  45. Rodrik, D. 2000. “Institutions for High-Quality Growth: What They Are and How to Acquire Them.”Studies in Comparative International Development 35, 3: 3–31.Google Scholar
  46. Roland, G. 1989.Economie politique du système soviétique. Paris: Editions de l’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  47. — 1991. “The Political Economy of Transition in the Soviet Union.”European Economy 49: 197–216.Google Scholar
  48. — 2000.Transition and Economics: Politics, Markets and Firms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. — 2002. “Ten Years After … Transition and Economics.”IMF Staff Papers 48 (Special Issue): 29–52.Google Scholar
  50. Sachs, J. and W. Woo 1994. “Structural Factors in the Economic Reforms of China, Eastern Europe, and the Former Soviet Union.”Economic Policy 18: 102–45.Google Scholar
  51. Shleifer, A. and R. Vihny 1994. “Politicians and Firms.”The Quarterly Journal of Economics 109, 4: 995–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weingast, B. 1995. “The Economic Role of Political Institutions: Market-Preserving Federalism and Economic Growth.”Journal of Economics, Law and Organization 11: 1–31.Google Scholar
  53. Weitzman, M. and C. Xu 1993. “Chinese Township and Village Enterprises as Vaguely Defined Cooperatives.”Journal of Comparative Economics 3, 1: 276–308.Google Scholar
  54. Williamson, O. 1975.Markets and Hierarchies. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  55. — 1985.The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gérard Roland

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations