Theory and Society

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 161–186 | Cite as

Overcoming path dependency: path generation in open systems

Article

Abstract

Studies on societal path dependencies tend to focus on mechanisms that anchor and stabilize national trajectories while paying less attention to transnational interactions and multilevel governance. This paper explores processes of path transformation in societies that are presumed to have the characteristics of open systems. Two pairs of case studies are presented and compared. The first illustrates institutional change through collision, when a national path meets with another. The second describes the emergence of transnational institutional paths and the impact of that process on national institutions and their (potential) transformation. The results indicate that path transformation often stems from a gradual succession and combination of incremental steps and junctures – change is gradual but consequential. They also point to increasing co-evolutionary interaction between national path transformation and transnational path creation. This implies a need for analytical tools that are adapted to the analysis of multi-level, nested processes of institutionalization and de-institutionalization. The paper suggests that the concept of path generation allows for a better specification of the conditions for change in existing societal paths and for the emergence of new paths in the case of open systems than the concept of path dependency.

References

  1. Amable, B. (2003). The diversity of modern capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aoki, M. (2001). Toward a comparative institutional analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal, 99, 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ballwieser, W. (Ed.) (1998). US-Amerikanische Rechnungslegung. Grundlagen und Vergleiche mit dem deutschen Recht. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.Google Scholar
  5. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  6. Berghahn, V. (1986). The Americanization of West German industry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Beyer, J. (1998). Managerherrschaft in Deutschland? “Corporate Governance” unter Verflechtungsbedingungen. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. Beyer, J. (2006). Pfadabhängigkeit ist nicht gleich Pfadabhängigkeit! Wider den impliziten Konservatismus eines gängigen Konzepts. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 34(1), 5–21.Google Scholar
  9. Botzem, S. (forthcoming). Transnational expert-driven standardization – accountancy governance from a professional point of view. In J.-C. Graz & A. Nölke (Eds.), Transnational Private Governance and its Limits. London: Routldege Google Scholar
  10. Botzem, S., & Quack, S. (2006). Contested rules and shifting boundaries: International standard setting in accounting. In M.-L. Djelic & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brunsson, N., & Jacobsson, B. (Eds.) (2000). A world of standards. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Campbell, J. L. (2004). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Campbell, J. L., & Pederson, O. K. (Eds.) (1996). Legacies of change. Transformation of postcommunist European economies. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  14. Clemens, E., & Cook, J. (1999). Politics and institutionalism: Explaining durability and change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 244–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Commission of the European Communities (1995). Competition policy in the new trade order: Strengthening international co-operation and rules. (Van Miert Report). Brussels: EU Commission.Google Scholar
  16. Crouch, C. (2005a). Capitalist diversity and change. Recombinant governance and institutional entrepreneurs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Crouch, C. (2005b). Complementarity and fit in the study of comparative capitalisms. In G. Morgan, R. Whitley, & E. Moen (Eds.), Changing capitalisms? Internationalization, institutional change, and systems of economic organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Crouch, C., & Farrell, H. (2002). Breaking the path of institutional development? Alternatives to the new determinism. Discussion Paper 02/5. Cologne: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.Google Scholar
  19. Daley, L. A., & Mueller, G. G. (1982). Accounting in the arena of world politics. Crosscurrents of international standard-setting activities. Journal of Accountancy, February, 40–50.Google Scholar
  20. Damm, W. (1958). National and international factors influencing cartel legislation in Germany. PhD Dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  21. David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75, 332–337.Google Scholar
  22. Deeg, R. (2001). Institutional change and the uses and limits of path dependency: The case of German finance. Discussion Paper 01/6. Cologne: Max Planck Institute for the study of societies.Google Scholar
  23. Deeg, R. (2005). Change from within: German and Italian finance in the 1990s. In K. Thelen & W. Streeck (Eds.), Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (Eds.) (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  25. Djelic, M.-L. (1998). Exporting the American model. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Djelic, M.-L. (2002). Does Europe mean Americanization? The case of competition. Competition and Change, 6(3), 223–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Djelic, M.-L., & Kleiner, T. (2006). The international competition network: Moving towards transnational governance. In M.-L. Djelic & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (2003a). Globalization and institutions: Redefining the rules of the economic game. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  29. Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (2003b). Conclusion: Globalization as a double process of institutional change and institution building. In M.-L. Djelic & S. Quack (Eds.), Globalization and institutions: Redefining the rules of the economic game. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  30. Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (2003c). Theoretical building blocks for a research agenda linking globalization and institutions. In M.-L. Djelic & S. Quack (Eds.), Globalization and institutions: Redefining the rules of the economic game. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  31. Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (2005). Rethinking path dependency: The crooked path of institutional change in Post-War Germany. In G. Morgan, R. Whitley, & E. Moen (Eds.), Changing capitalism? Internationalization, institutional change, and systems of economic organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Djelic, M.-L., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Eds.) (2006). Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Douglas, M. (1986). How institutions think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Ebbinghaus, B. (2005). Can path dependence explain institutional change? Two approaches applied to welfare state reform. Discussion Paper 05/2. Cologne: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.Google Scholar
  35. Fligstein, N. (1990). The transformation of corporate control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. (Eds.) (2001). Path dependence and creation. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  37. Haley, J. O. (2001). Antitrust in Germany and Japan: The first fifty years: 1947–1998. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  38. Hall, P., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Haller, A. (2002). Financial accounting developments in the European Union: Past events and future prospects. The European Accounting Review, 11(1), 153–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hanson, S. (1998). Analyzing post-communist economic change: A review essay. East European Politics and Society, 12, 145–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hausleutner, J. P. (1970). Die Kartellrechtliche Bereichsausnahme für das Kreditgewerbe und die Fachaufsicht nach dem Kreditwesengesetz. Dissertation, University of Kiel, Germany.Google Scholar
  42. Herrigel, G. (1996). Industrial constructions. The sources of German industrial power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Höpner, M., & Krempel, L. (2003). The politics of the German company network. Working Paper 03/9. Cologne: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.Google Scholar
  44. Horstmann, T. (1991). Die Alliierten und die deutschen Großbanken. Bankenpolitik nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg in Westdeutschland. Bonn: Bouvier Verlag.Google Scholar
  45. Hüttenberger, P. (1976). Wirtschaftsordnung und Interessenpolitik in der Kartellgesetzgebung der Bundesrepublik. 1949–1957. Vierteljahreshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 24/3, 287–307.Google Scholar
  46. ICPAC (International Competition Policy Advisory Committee) (2000). ICPAC Final Report. Retrived October 12, 2006, from http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/icpac/finalreport.htm.
  47. Jacoby, W. (2000). Imitation and politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Jalabert-Doury, N. (2003). The international competition network, convergence in merger control? International Business Law Journal, 6, 697–710.Google Scholar
  49. Johnson, J. (2001). Path contingency in postcommunist transformations. Comparative Politics, 33(3), 253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kleekämper, H. (1995). Aktuelle Entwicklungen beim IASC. Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung und Praxis, 4, 414–431.Google Scholar
  51. Kleiner, T. (2003). Building up an asset management industry: Forays of an Anglo-Saxon logic into French business system. In M.-L. Djelic & S. Quack (Eds.), Globalization and institutions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  52. Lane, C. (2005). Institutional transformation and system change: Changes in the corporate governance of German corporations. In G. Morgan, R. Whitley, & E. Moen (Eds.), Changing capitalism? Internationalization, institutional change, and systems of economic organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Lütz, S. (2002). Der Staat und die Globalisierung von Finanzmärkten: Regulative Politik in Deutschland, Großbritannien und den USA. Frankfurt/Main: Campus.Google Scholar
  54. Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1998). The institutional dynamics of international political orders. International Organization, 52(4), 943–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Maurice, M., & Sorge, A. (Eds.) (2000). Embedding organizations. Societal analysis of actors, organizations and socio-economic context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  57. Mayntz, R., & Scharpf, F. W. (1995). Der Ansatz des Akteurszentrierten Institutionalismus. In R. Mayntz & F. W. Scharpf (Eds.), Steuerung und Selbstorganisation in staatsnahen Sektoren. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
  58. McNichol, J., & Bensedrine, J. (2003). Multilateral rulemaking: transatlantic struggles around genetically modified food. In M.-L. Djelic & S. Quack (Eds.), Globalization and institutions. Redefining the rules of the economic game. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  59. Melamed, D. (2000). Promoting sound antitrust enforcement in the global economy. Speech of the Acting Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, US DOJ, before the Fordham Corporate Law Institute 27th Annual Conference on International Antitrust Law and Policy, New York, October 19. Retrieved from http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/speeches/6785.htm.
  60. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Monti, M. (2002). A global competition policy? Speech by the European Commissioner for Competition at the European Competition Day, Copenhagen, September 17. Retrieved October 12, 2006, from http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/speeches/ index _speeches_by_the_commissioner.html.
  62. Morgan, G., & Kubo, I. (2005). Beyond path dependency? Constructing new models for institutional change: The case of capital markets in Japan. Socio-Economic Review, 3(1), 55–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Morgan, G., & Quack, S. (2000). Confidence and confidentiality: The social construction of performance standards in banking. In S. Quack, G. Morgan, & R. Whitley (Eds.), National capitalisms, global competition, and economic performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  64. Morgan, G., & Quack, S. (2005). Institutional legacies and firm dynamics: The growth and internationalization of British and German law firms. Organization Studies, 26(12), 1765–1785.Google Scholar
  65. Morgan, G., Whitley, R., & Moen, E. (Eds.) (2005). Changing capitalisms? Internationalization, institutional change, and systems of economic organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Muris, T. (2002). Competition agencies in a market based global economy. Speech of the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission at the Annual Lecture of the European Foreign Affairs Review, Brussels, July 23). Retrieved from http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/muris/020723brussels.htm.
  67. Murrell, P. (1995). The transition according to Cambridge, Mass. Journal of Economic Literature, 33, 164–178.Google Scholar
  68. Nawrocki, J. (1973). Komplott der ehrbaren Konzerne. Marktmanipulation, Wettbewerbsverzerrung, Preisdiktate. Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe.Google Scholar
  69. Nobes, C., & Parker, R. (Eds.) (1985). Comparative international accounting. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  70. North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Padgett, J. (2001). Organizational genesis, identity and control: The transformation of banking in Renaissance Florence. In A. Cassella & J. Rauch (Eds.), Markets and networks. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  72. Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94, 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pittman, R. (1998). Competition law and policy in the United States. Working Paper US Department of Justice. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  74. Pons, J.-F. (2002). Is it time for an International Agreement on Antitrust? Speech at “The Future of Transnational Antitrust: From Comparative to Common Competition Law,” organized by the Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Patent, Copyright, and Competition Law and the University of Munich Institute for International Law, Frauenchiemsee, Germany, June 3–5.Google Scholar
  75. Quack, S. (2006). Die transnationalen Ursprünge des,deutschen Kapitalismus. In V. Berghahn & S. Vitols (Eds.), Gibt es einen deutschen Kapitalismus? Frankfurt/Main: Campus.Google Scholar
  76. Quack, S., & Djelic, M.-L. (2005). Adaptation, recombination, and reinforcement: The story of antitrust and competition law in Germany and Europe. In W. Streeck & K. Thelen (Eds.), Beyond continuity. Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Robert, R. (1976). Konzentrationspolitik in der Bundesrepublik – Das Beispiel der Entstehung des Gesetzes gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  78. Rouam, C., Thinam, J., & Lisbe, S. (1994). La politique de concurrence de la communauté à l’échelle mondiale: l’exportation des règles de concurrence communautaires. EC Competition Policy Newsletter, 1(1), 7–11.Google Scholar
  79. Samuels, J. M., & Piper, A. G. (1985). International accounting: A survey. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  80. Schaub, A. (2000). Assessing international mergers: The Commission’s approach. Speech of the Director General for Competition, European Commission at the EC Merger Control 10th Anniversary Conference, Brussels, September 14–15. Retrieved October 12, 2006, from http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/speeches/text/sp2000_015_en.html.
  81. Schmidt, H. A. (1995). Die Europäisierung des Kartellrechts im Bereich der Kredit- und Versicherungswirtschaft. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  82. Schneiberg, M. (2007). What’s on the path? Path dependence, organizational diversity and the problem of institutional change in the US economy, 1900–1950. Socio-Economic Review, 5, 47–80.Google Scholar
  83. Scholtyseck, J. (2000). Die USA vs. “The Big Six.” Der gescheiterte Bankenprozeß nach dem zweiten Weltkrieg. Bankhistorisches Archiv, 26, 27–53.Google Scholar
  84. Schreyögg, G., Sydow, J., & Koch, J. (2003). Organisatiorische Pfade – von der Pfadabhängigkeit zur Pfadkreation? Managementforschung, 13, 257–294.Google Scholar
  85. Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  86. Sewell, W. H. (1996). Three temporalities: Toward an eventful sociology. In T. J. McDonald (Ed.), The historic turn in the human sciences. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  87. Shonfield, A. (1977 [1965]). Modern capitalism. The changing balance of public and private power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Sorge, A. (2005). The global and the local. Understanding the dialectics of business systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Stark, D. (1992). Path dependence and privatization strategies in East Central Europe. East European Politics and Societies, 6(1), 17–54.Google Scholar
  90. Stark, D., & Bruszt, L. (1998). Postsocialist pathways. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Streeck, W. (1991). On the institutional conditions of diversified quality production. In E. Matzner & W. Streeck (Eds.), Beyond Keynesianism: The socio-economics of production and full employment. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  92. Streeck, W., & Höpner, M. (2003). Einleitung: Alle Macht dem Markt? In W. Streeck & M. Höpner (Eds.), Alle Macht dem Markt? Fallstudien zur Abwicklung der Deutschland AG. Frankfurt/Main: Campus.Google Scholar
  93. Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (Eds.) (2005a). Beyond continuity – Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005b). Introduction: Institutional change in advanced political economies. In W. Streeck & K. Thelen (Eds.) (2005a). Beyond continuity – Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Tamm Hallström, K. (2004). Organizing international standardization. ISO and the IASC in quest of authority. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  96. Thelen, K. (2003). How institutions evolve. Insights from comparative historical analysis. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Thelen, K. (2004). How institutions evolve. The political economy of skills in Germany, Britain, the United States and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Thorell, P., & Whittington, G. (1994). The harmonization of accounting within the EU. Problems, perspectives and strategies. European Accounting Review, 3/2, 215–239.Google Scholar
  99. Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1996). The institutionalization of institutional theory. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  100. Van Miert, K. (1997). International cooperation in the field of competition. A view from the EC. Speech by the European Commissioner before the Fordham Corporate Law Institute 24th Annual Conference. New York, October 16. Retrieved October 12, 2006, from http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/speeches/text/sp1997_073_en.html.
  101. Vitols, S. (2001). The origins of bank-based and market-based financial systems: Germany, Japan, and the United States. Discussion Paper FS I 01–302, Berlin: Social Science Research Center Berlin.Google Scholar
  102. Vorwold, G. (2000). Das Modell “FASB” in den USA – Ein Fehlschlag. Internationales Steuerrecht, 19, 599–607.Google Scholar
  103. Weir, M. (1992). Politics and jobs: The boundaries of employment policy in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  104. Westney, D. E. (1987). Imitation and innovation. The transfer of Western organizational patterns to Meiji Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  105. Whitley, R. (1999). Divergent Capitalisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  106. Windolf, P., & Beyer, J. (1995). Unternehmensverflechtung im internationalen Vergleich. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 47(1), 1–36.Google Scholar
  107. WTO (2000). Report of the working group on the interaction between trade and competition policy to the General Council. Retrieved from http://docsonline.wto.org/imrd/.
  108. Zeiler, T. (1999). Free trade, free world: The advent of GATT. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+ Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Management DepartmentESSEC Business SchoolCergy-Pontoise Cedex, ParisFrance
  2. 2.Internationalization and OrganizationSocial Science Research Center BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations