AstCentury

POLITICAL
SCIE,I{CE,
ARtftrenceHandbook"
Voh*, 1

Edited by

hn T. Ishiyama
Marijke Breuning
Uniuersity of North Texas

,t:. I

osAcElffi oe
L6Ans{s I Lordo tN6v
sln$por | washlnglon Dc 20/O
 SysrsNas Tsony AND
S rnucruner FrrNCTroNALrsM

JosN R. Frsren
Northwest Missouri State University

lthough structural functionalism finds its roots systems theory. Both have value in the study of politi
A much earlier than systems does theory, as cal systems.
I ^ lesearchers use it today, it is based on systems
theory. Structural functionalism traces its beginnings
baok to the ancient Greeks and the writings of Aristotle
(Susser, 1992). Systems theory emerged much later.
Systems Theory
Although the discussion ofsystems began with biologists
A system, according to Anatol Rapoport (1966, 1968), is a
in the l9th century systms theory was not fully artiou-
set of interrelated entities connected by behavior and his-
lated until the 1920s. Ludwig von Bertalanry (1956,
tory Specifically, he stated that a system must satisry the
1962), who developed general systems theory was a
following criteria:
principal in establishing it as a field of study. Although
systems theory originated later than functionalism, when
researchers study functions within their structures, they
1. One can speciry I set of identifiable elements.
2. Among at lest som of the elemnts, one can speciry
do it within the scope of systems. The study of political
identifiable elations,
systems came into its own with the adoption of a struc- 3. Certain relations imply others.
tural-fu nctional approach. 4. A crtain complex of elations at a given time implies a
The systems approach of David Easton (1965a, certin complox (or one of several possible complexes)
l95b) and Karl W. Deutsch (1963) grew out ofsooio- at a later tim. (Rapoport, 1966, pp. 129-130)
logical and communioation theory and a "move toward
the theory and data of politios" (Almond & Powell, This definition is broad enough to include systems as dif-
1966, p. l2). Easton and Deutsch followed a commu- ferent as the solar system and language. Social systems,
nication, or cybernetic, model to study politics. including economics and politics, fit within the definition.
Gabriel A. Almond's study of political systems grew Social systems might be described as a olass of entities
out of a tradition of political theory and draws from (individuals, families, institutions) with relations among
sociological and communications theories. White them (communication ohannels, influence, obligations).
Easton and Deutsch adopted a purely systems Systems are classified by the "nahe of their relation to
approach, Almond applied structural functionalism to their environments" and the "search for laws goveming the
72 COMPARTTVE POLITICS

behavior ofeach class" (Rapoport, 1968, p. 453). Systems interest rticultion, interest ggregation, and politicl
appear to have "a will" of their own and a 'urpose" to communication. Easton called the ouuts decions, ar
maintain a steady state. Living systems do this through Almond arid Coleman describe ouuts as rule making rule
homeostasis mechanisms tht restore equilibrium. Social application, and rule adjudicatioz. Mitchell (1962) irsed the
systems have similar mechanisms (Rapopo( l98). t$ms expeclations and danands, resources, and support for
'While
systems in the physical sciences (like the solar inputs and social goals, values and oss, and conrols to
system, chemical reactions, and ecological systems) are express political ouuts.
extremely rigorous, social sysms re less precise. In social While boundary exchanges play an important part in the
systems, the elements and relations are vague and hard to analysis ofpolitical systems, the main concern is with the
define. As the basic unit of social systems, roles are com- intemal processes of a system. An early area of inquiry
monly diffcult to identify and olassifo. For the "hard" sci- dealt with the question of how politics would allocate scarce
ences, this ambiguity would be regarded as problematic, but resources @aston, 1953; Mitchell, 1968). Other areas of
it
rvith the social sciences, would be commonplace procss investigation concemed the stability of systems,
(Rapopo$ 1966). political socialization, and other support inputs. A third
area of examination surrounded the means of ensuring loy-
The Political System alty and stimulating public participation. A fourth area
looked at the means of achieving collective goals "from
A long-standing problem of political science has been diverse individual demands" (Mitchell, 1968, p. 475).
to describe and account for the intemal structure of the Finall the prooess of dealing with problems within the
poltical system. According to William Mitchell (1968), political system became a matter of inspection. Mitchell
structure is generally applied to pattems of power and (1962) viewed the intemal processes ofthe polity as pl-
authority that characterize the relationships between the lel to those ofthe larger social system. He suggested foous-
rulers and the ruled. These relationships are enduring and ing on goal attainment, adapation, system maintenance
thus predictable. and tension management, and integration.
In systems theory the unit of analysis for these power
relations is rolq a concept developed in social psychology Applying Systems Analysis
and applied to sociology. Political roles deal with decision
making on behalf of society and with performing actions Easton (1966) proposed to define political systems
that implement the decisions and allocate scaroe resources. more broadly than did Rapoport. Easton defined a system
In analyzing the political system, the researoher typically as "any set of variables regardless of the degtee, of inter-
describes these roles and the people performing them. relationship among them" . l4?). He prefened this defi-
Traditionally, the main approach to classification has been nition because it fieed the researcher fiom the need to prove
"the distribution ofpower" (Mitchell, 1968,p. 474) among that a political system is really a system. The only question
the members ofthe system. Because the one dimension of of importance became whether the system was interesting
roles has inadequately described political systems, systems and thus worth studying. The analysis need only provide
analysts have developed more inclusive variables that lend understanding and an explanation of the human behavior
themselves better to measurement (Mitchell, 1968). that was of concem to the tesearcher.
Talcott Prsons (1951) put forth a set of variables that he Easton (1953, 1966) suggested thai a political system
called patterv-vari.ales. Gabriel Almond (1956; Almond was distinct from other systems because it concemed
& Coleman, 1960) suggested classifring structures based itself vith "the interactions through which values are
on (a) the degree of differentiation between structures, authoritatively allocated fo a society" (1966, p. 147).
(b) the extent to whioh the system is "manifest" or "visi- He divided the political environment into two parts: the
ble,"(c) the stability of the functions of the various roles, intrasocietal and lhe extrasociell. The first comprises
and (d) the distribution ofpower. Mitchell (1968) added a those systems in the same society as the political system
fith dimension, conceming the "susainability of roles." that are not political systems because they do not have
A system is genemlly thought of as being self-contained political interactions. Intrasocietal systems form the seg-
and distinct from its environment with observable bound- ments of society ofwhich the political system is a com-
aries. In the process of dermining formal memben (or cit- ponent, including the econom culture, social struoture,
izens) and their actions, boundaries are arbitrarily assigned and personalities. These systems create and shape the
to the political system. However, most systems are subject to conditions in which the political system operates. A
extemal influences. Thus, analysis must also be concemed changing econom culture, or social structure all have
with 'etecting relationships across boundaries" as inputs impact on political life.
and ouuts (Mitchell, 1968, p. 475). Yet no common lan- The extrasocietal envronment includes all the systems
guage exists to describe these bounday exchanges of inputs that are outside the given society. They may form a
and outputs. Easton (1957, 1965a) sw inputs as consisting suprsystem of whioh the political system may be a part.
of demands and support while Almond and Jamss Coleman Al example of an exhasocietal system is the intemational
(1960) used lhe rms political socialzation, recruitment, cultural system.
 Slsterns Theory nd Sttucturl Fanconslsm . 73

From the inha- and exhasocietal systems come influ- indicators. He designaed the effects that are transmitted
ences that may cause possible stress on the
political sys- across the boundary of a system toward some other system
m. Intemal or external disturbances to the intra- and as the outputs of the first system and the inprri of the sec-
extrasocietal systems may cause stress on the political sys- ond system. A hansction or an exohange between systems
tem and thus change it. However, it is also possible that can be viewed as a linkage between them in the form ofan
some disturbances may aid in the persistence ofthe system input--ouut relationship.
while others may be neuhal vith regard to shess. Ifpolit- lnputs serve as a powerftrl analytic tool because they
ical systems are to continue, they must fulll two func- summarize variables that "concentrate and minor every-
tions. They must be able to allocate values to society and thing in the environment that is relevant to political stress"
get most members ofsociety to accept the values. The allo- (Easton, 1966, p. 150). The extent to which inputs can be
oation of values for a society and compliance with them used as summary variables depends on how they are defined.
are essential variables of political life and distinguish In thei broadest sense, they include "any event extemal to
political systems from other systems. By identif,ing these the system that altes, modifies, or affects the system in
essential variables, esearches can determine when and any way" (p. i50). However, by focusing on boundary-
how distubances can cause stress to the system. crossing inputs dealing with the most impoftnt effects
Easton 966) provides examples of defet at the hands
(I contributing to shess, one can simplify the task ofanalyz-
ofan enemy or ofa severe economic crisis causing wide- ing the impact ofthe environment. Analysts no longer need
spread disorganization and disaffection. When authorities "to deal with and hace out separately the consequences of
ae unable to make decisions o decisions are no longer each type of environmental event" (p. 150). For this pur-
accepted by societal members, system allocations of val- pose, Easton (1966) recommends focusing on two major
ues are no longer possible, and the society collapses. More inputs: demands and support. "Through them, a wide
likely, the disruption ofa political system is not that com- range of activities in the environment can be channeled,
plete, and the system continues in some form. As long as mirrored, summarized, and brought to bear upon political
the system oan keep these essential variables operating, the life," he wrote, and "Hence, they are key indicators of the
system rvill persist. The capacify to counte shess is crucial way in which envionmental influsnces and conditions
to the survival of the system. The system's history of modi$ and shape the operations of the political system,'
response to shess allows analysts to determine whether it (p. l5l). As inputs to a system, demands and supports can
is able lo survive dishrbances. Easton (1966) olaimed that be of different types: material and political demands, as
sysiems analysis is especially suited "for interpretng the well as material and political supports. Easton (1965b)
behavior of the membes in a system in the light of the cites expressions of opinion and calls for a decision as
consequences this behavior has for alleviating or aggravat- examples of demands. A flood may create grievnces that
ing shess upon the essential variables" (p. 149). lead to demands fo building a dam. The conventional way
According to Eston (1966), systems analysis provides of making demands is to make individual requests, write
a way of determining the impact of the many diverse envi- letters, and oarry out other forms of lobbying. More
ronmental influences on a system. In this way, it is possi- unconventional approaches to making political demands
ble to educe the blow of stresses on the system and would be to demonshate or picket. As citizens, through let-
recommend appropriate action. Th.ough the use of the ters, polls, or voting, voice agreement with a decision to
concepts of inputs and outputs, the enormous variety of build the dam, they provide political support. The willing-
influences can be reduced into a manageable number of ness to pay taxes to build the dam is also a form of support.
indicators. The distinction between a politicat system and Demands and supports are closely interrelated. Easton
other systems allows for interpretation of behaviors in the states that "by the very act ofvoicing a demand or propos-
environment as exchanges or hansactions that cross the ing it for serious discussion, a member will imply that he
bounclaries of the politicel system. Easton used the term supports it in some measue" G. 5l). By examining the
exchanges to refer to "the mutuality of the relationships changes in the inputs of demands and support, analysts cn
between the politioal system and the other systems in the determine the effects of the environmental systems trans-
envircnment" (p. 150). The erm fransactbrJ was used..to mitted to the politioal system.
emphasize the movement of an effect in one direction, Similarly, ouuts help interpret "the consequenoes
from an environmental system to the politioal system, or flowing from the behavior of the membe of the sysem
the reverse, without being concemed at the time about the rather than fiom actions in the environmenf' (Easton,
eactive behavior ofthe other system" (p. 150). 1966, p. l5l). Since the activities of members ofthe sys-
tem have an impact on their own subsequent actions or
Inpu nd Outputs conditions, those actions that flow out of a system into its
environment oannot be ignored. Because a great amount of
Because sysems are coupled together, all behavior in activity iakes place within political system, it is useful to
a
society is interdependent. To trace the complex exohanges isolate those elements that ae important in understanding
and reduce them to manageable proportions, Easton con- the system. One way of doing this is to examine the impact
densed the main environmental influences into a few of inputs (reflected as demands and support) on political
?4. COMPRATM POLITICS

outputs. Easton defines political outputs as the decisions ouuts can be readily identified, they may not have been
and actions ofthe authorities. A govemment's decision to adequately studied.
build a dam would be a political output; the actual build- Bemard Susser (1992) indicated that Easton's bmnd of
ing ofthe dam would be a material ouut. "input-ouuf' analysis is use.d very little in actual research,
This approach was a departure from previous research and when it is used, "its contribution tums out to be more ter-
that examined the complex political processes intemal to a minological than real" . I 85). The problem is that it is prac-
system in terms ofwho controls whom in the various deci- tically impossible to study a system without looking at the
sion-making processes. While the pattem of power rela- past. Wthout rmderstanding the system's development and
tionships helps to determine the nature of the outputs, the its hisorioal sengths and weaknesses, it would be difficult
outcomes of intemal political processes are most useful in to tell whether an event is crisis or a normal sihation.
hacing the consequences of behavior within a political While systems theory generally is regarded as being
system for its environment. supportive of the status quo and thus conservative in its
Easton (1966) claimed that "ouuts not only help to nature, it is interesting to note that at ths time Easton pro-
influence events in the broader society ofwhich the system posed systems analysis for politics, many people consid-
is a part, but also, in doing so, they help to determine each ered it as having a liberal bent. The 1960s was a time when
succeeding round of inputs that finds its way into the polit- behavioralists made great contributions to research in
ical system" . 152). By identifring this "feedback loop," many fields. Conservatives looked at systems analysis as
analysts can explain the processes the system can use to value-laden based on song conceptualizations as opposed
cope with stress and make recommendations that alter the to neutrl impassionate soience. In addition, looking at
system's fture behavior. Easton desoribes the feedbaok political systems as equilibrium seeking, self-balancing
loop as consisting of "the production of outputs by the entities also suggested clear ideological biases. However,
authorities, a response by the members of the society to systems analysis had none of the "stress, conhadiction,
these ouuts, the communication of information about confliot, and imbalance [that] characterize the'normal'
this response to the authorities, and finally, possible suc- condition of the modem state" (Susser, 1992, p. 186) pro-
ceeding actions by the authorities" . 152). For attions to posed by Marxists. Easton's system's "normal" state \,s
be taken to satisry demands or ceate conditions that will one of "adaptive dynamic stability" (Susser, 1992, p. 186).
do so, information must be provided to authorities (those
people who speak on behalf of the system) about the
effects of each round of outputs. Since a drop in support is Structural Functionalism
an important source of stress, information feedback to
these authorities is crucial so that they can "bolste the The termslunclional analys and struclural analys have
input of support fo themselves or for the system as a been applied to a great variety of approaches (Cancian,
whole" . 152). Information about the consequences of 198; Merton, 1968). With their broad use in the social sci-
each round of outputs and about the changing conditions ences has come discussion of the appropriateness of the
that impact members is essential because it enables author- use ofstrucftue and function and the type ofanalysis asso-
ities to take actjon to kep supPort at a minimal level. oiated with the concepts (Levy, 1968). The functional
Appropriate response to the feedback pocess can have "a approach is used more often than any othe method in the
profound influence on the capacity of a system to cope study of Westem political science (Susse 1992). The pro-
with stress and persist" (p. 152). fessional literature is full of references to the "functions"
of political systems and to the relation between structure
and funotion. Sometimes the terms are used without a clear
Criticisms of Systerns Analysis
understanding ofthe meaning of the functionalist position,
Criticisms ofsystems analysis have focused mainly on more as linguistic fashion. This seotion deals with the the-
three areas: methodological weaknesses of the approach, oretical implications of structural functionalism and its
the lack of suitability for empirical research, and strong relationship to political science.
political bias (Mitchell, 1968; Susser, 1992). Some critics Although structural functionalism predated systems
claim systems analysis is misleading because it assumes theory it still presupposes a "systems" view of the politi-
that "reality 'really'consists of systems." This view sug- cal world. Similarities link functionalism to systems analy-
gests that "societies consist of far moe individual and sis. Susser (1992) writes that both focus on input--output
isolated events than systems lanalysis] is capable ofhan- analysis, both see political systems as striving for homeosta-
dling" (Mitchell, 1968, p. 477). Another spect of the sis or equilibrium, and both conside feedback in their
criticism is tht identiing boundaries and variables in analysis. Yet functionalism is significantly different.
the system is difcult, thus making it hard to formulate
operational definitions and perform empirical research. History of Structural Functionalism
Furthermore, critics claim that the concept ofequilibrium
cannot be operationally defined except perhaps in terms Structural fnctionalism has a lengthy history in both
of economic behavior. Finally, although the inputs and the social sciences (Merton, 1968) and the biological
 Systems Theory and Structural Funaonlism o '15

sciences (Woodger, 1948). Functionalism's history goes Varieties of Functional Analysis

back to Aistotle's study of ultimate causes in nature or of
actions in relation to their ends, or utiliry Developed in Most functional approaches share one common element:
lTth-century France, Montesquieu's doctrine of sepamtion "an interest in relating one part ofa society or social system
ofpowers is based on the notion of ftnctions that are best to another part or to some aspect of the whole" (Cancian,
undertaken separate from each oter as a means of ensur- 1968, p. 29). Three types offunctionalism exist within this
ing stability and security. approach, and most functional analysis contains all tkee.
Functionalism became important when Dawin's evolu- The first is based on the concepts and assumptions ofsoci-
tionary theories began to influence thinking about human ology; the second, on the supposition that social pattems
behavior Darwin conceived ofthe idea ofsurvival in func- maintain the larger social system; and the third, on "a
tional terms. Each function was important to the survival of model ofself-regulating and equilibrating systems" @. 29).
the whole system. Systems that could not adapt their func- Francesca M. Cancian (198) describes two distinctive
tions ceased to exists. Other students of human behavior types of functional analysis: traditional and formal.
bonowed these ideas, applying them to social affairs. Thus, Traditonal functionl analyss is the most commonly
sooial Darwinism impofed these same funotionalist cate- used. It is based on the premise that all social patterns
gories into social analysis. Social Darwinists claimed that work to maintain the integration and adaptation of the
society benefited from unestrained competition between larger system. Two attributes further distinguish haditional
units, that functional adaptability was required for survival, functional analysis from othe forms of analysis. First, a
and that attempts to protect the weak hampered the func- social pattem is explained by the effects or consequences
tioning of society as a whole. These ideas first influenced of that pattem, and, second, these results must be benefi-
anthropology and then sociology. Implicitty through the cial and necessary to the proper functioning of society.
works of mile Durkheim and explicitly through Parsons Researchers take one of two tacks when using traditional
(1951) and Robert Merton (1968), these ideas became cen- functional analysis. They may examine only a few aspects
tral to the social sciences. Almond's "Inhoduction" to Z of society at a time and attempt to link one social pattem
Politits of Developing Areas (Almond & Coleman, I 960), with one need and thus explain the pattem. Altematively,
applied functionalist ideas to political life. they may deal with more complex systems, trying to show
Susser (1992) indicates that the analogy ofhuman social how these elements are intenelated so as to form an adap-
life is organic, not mechanical. Meohanical analogies imply tive and consistent system.
a certin "looseness of assooiation" (p. 203) between the Forml functional analysis is called formal beaasse it
parts. While the parts of a motor function as a unit, pafs does not include a theoretical orienttion or a substantive
can be easily removed and replaced, making their union hypothesis about events. Rathe it examines the relation-
less essential and the ability to exist autonomously less ships between elements. It conhasts with the traditional
likely. In the organic analogy, "Individual elements depend type of analysis in that its proponents reject the athibutes
on the whole for their maintenance" . 204). Functionalists of "integration" and "adaptation" in favor of an examina-
tend to view sooial and political units in rnore holistic, tion of the equilibrating or feedback functions in systems.
oganic terms. "Social pmctioes are said to have a func- The effects ofa hait are used to explain the system rather
tional role in sustaining the system as a whole" . 204). than the hait. No restrictions exist on the kinds of conse-
Functionalists equate strucfure to anatomy and functions to quenoes that are considered, Consequences may or may
the physiolog) of organisms. not be beneficial or necessary for society.
When only stuotural categories are used to make polit- Cancian (1968) provides an example to contrast the two
ical comparisons, "The comparative analysis of political types of analysis with the nonfunotionalist approach. A
systems breaks down as the difference between compared nonfunctionalist would explain adolesoent rebellion by
struotures inoeases" (Susser, 1992, p. 205). For example, examining the causes of the rebellion. A traditional frnc-
the structues between a Western demooraoy and an tionalist would explain the effects or functions of the
Afcan tribe are so very different as to make comparison rebellion. A formal functionalist would foous on the
difcult. However, functions are much more oomparable. equilibrating or feedback systems and not on the relation-
Although a prime minister and hibal chief are difficult o ships of one-way effect or cause. In practice, Cancian
compare institutionally, they nevertheless serve many sim- noted, these approaches are usually combined. Almond
ilar functions. Although the shuctues of political rule may and Coleman (1960) rejected traditional analysis, adopting
be very dissimilar, the functions that political systems per- a more formal approach.
form are universal. Although undeveloped political sys-
tems assign numerous functions to a single psrson or Applying Functional Analysis
institution, in more developed political systems, the same to the Study of Politics
functions may be performed by many individuals o insti
tutions. One of the primary areas of study in functionalism According to Michael G. Smith (1966), four approaches
is the "interplay" between the dynamio funotons of a sys- ae useful in the comparative study of political systems:
tem and the more sttic structures it designs for itself. process, conten! function, and form. Studies based on
76 . COMPARTrVE POLITICS

process and content face huge obstaoles. In developed allocations are binding on society as a whole" . 130).
countries, the processes of government are "elaborately dif- Almond and Coleman (1960) sharpened Easton's defini-
ferentiated, discrete and easy to identify," but in simpler tion of authority by building in Vr'eber's notion of /gzfr-
societies, the same processes are 'rarely differentiated and mate physical compulsion. They viewed the political
discrete" . I l4). They occur within the context ofinstitu- system as "the legitimate, order-maintaining or transform-
tional activities that are difficult to analyze for political ing system in society" (p. 7).
processes. The more "differentiated and complex" the gov- With the concepts of input and ouut, Almond and
emment proce.sses, the "greater the rnge and complexity" Coleman (1960) moved from a definition ol politicl to
. 114) of content. Since content and process are "interde lhzt of system. They saw in the notion ofsystem properties
pendent and derivative," they require independent criteria that interget interactions ofsociety, whercas politicl sep-
for studying govemment . ll4). arated out the interactions in order to relate them to other
The functional approach does not have the same limi- ooncepts. Among the properties were comprehensiveness,
tations as process and oontent, It defines govemment as interdependence, and the existence of boundaries. Systems
all those activities that influence "the way in which analysis was comprehensive because it inoluded all inter-
authoritative decisions are formulated and executed for a actions, both inputs and ouuts. It was interdependent
society" (Easton, 1957, p. 38a). From this definition, var- because change in one subset of interactions would change
ious schemata were developed to study the nctions of others. The political system has boundaries in that there
government. Easton listed five modes of action as ele- are points where it begins and points where it ends and
ments of all politioal systems: legislation, adminishation, other systems take over,
adjudication, the development of demands, and the devel- Political systems have common properties, according to
opment of support and solidarity. These were grouped as Almond and Coleman (1960). Firsl all political systems,
input nd output requirements of political systems. even the simplest, have political structure. Second,.the
According to Almond and Coleman (1960), the required same functions are performed in all political systems.
inputs are political socialization and recruitment, interest Third, all politioal shucture is multifunotional, whether in
articulation, interest aggregation, and political communi- primitive or in modem sooieiies. Finally, all political sys-
cation. As ouuts, he identified rule making, rule appli- tems are "mixed" systems in the cultural sense. No society
oation, and rule adjudication. is strictly modem or only primitive.
In 1960, Almond and Coleman were the first to com- As stated previously, Almond and Coleman (1960)
pare the political systems of"developing" areas systemat- listed seven fimctions of all politioal sysems: political
ically according to a common set of categories. To do this, socialization, interest articulation, interest aggregation,
they felt, they oould no longer rely on the comparative political communioation, rule making, rule application,
approaches used to study governments in Westem Europe. and rule adjudication. The first four belong to the input
To find concepts and categories appropriate for use in side ofa system's flrnctioning, and the last three to its pol-
comparing developing countries, they tumed to sociolog- icy ouuts. Politioal comrnunication links inputs to out-
ical and anthropologioal theory (Almond & Coleman, puts in a way that provides the function ofa feedback loop.
1960). Rather than adding new terms, they adopted and Whereas Easton's systems analysis deals primarily with
adapted an old vocabulary to a new situation. lnstead of "demands and supports," Almond and Coleman's catego-
the concept ofstat, whioh would be limited by legal and rization of inputs and outputs in the political system is
institutional meanings, they usedpa/irical system; instead much more extensive and in fact has led to a multifaceted
of powers, ,ith its legal connotations, they preferred pproach to the study ofpolitics.
functions; instead of oices, they used roles,' instead of In their study ofpolitical systems, Almond and Powell
institutions, which diects thinking toward formal norms, (1966) considered the activities or functions from three
they used struclures; and instead of public opinion and points of view: the conversion functions of interest aficu-
citizenship training, lhey prefened political culture and lation, interest aggregation, political communication, rule
p o liti c I s o ci a liz ati on. making, rule application, and rule adjudioation; the opera-
In order to develop a system of categorization for all tion and capabilities of the political system in its environ-
sooieties, regardless of size and culture, Almond and ments; and the way in which political systems mainain or
Coleman (1960) had to modi$ their definitions ofpolitics adapt themselves to pressues for change over the long
and political systems. They felt the definitions ofpolitics term. These latter functions refened to tlre maintenance
that identifed societal functions as integration and adap- and adaptation functions ofpolitical recruitment and polit-
tation were inadequate in describing their concept of ical socialization.
political systems. Instead, they borrowed from Max
Weber's concept of state and Easton's view of power. An Example of the Functional Approach
Easton (1953) offered a definition with three components:
"The political system allocates values by means of poli- Many of Almond and Coleman's (1960) categories
cies; the allocations are authoritative; and its authoritative have become unique fields of study. For example, Fisher's
 Systems Theory aad Structural Functionalsm o 77

research on mass media's effect on political decision mak- Terminology Used in

ing drew on Almond and Coleman's categories and mass Structural-Functional Analysis
media functions to develop a taxonomy of meda functons
in policy making (Fisher, l99l; Fisher & Soemarsono, Struotural-functional analysis is made more difcult
2008). Whereas dre syslems view ofren refers to the .,non- because ofthe confusion ofterms. The difculty in speak-
descript conversion process" (Susser, 1992, p.206),the ing about struchlral functionalism comes from five
funotionalist approach deals explicitly with the steps sources, according to Levy (1968). First, the feeling exists
involved from articulating requirements to futfilling polit- that structural-functional analysis is something new, when
ical ouuts. in fact it is as old as the scientific method. Second, defin-
To show how structural functionalism fits within sys- itions are messy because terms are unclear and refer to
tems theory Fisher's studies of mass media functions in moe than one thing. Third, many esearchers make the
policy making ae examined (Fisher, l99l; Fishe & mistake of believing that final causes can be found from
Soemarsono, 2008). Those studies found 14 media func- their work. They assume that it is possible to find the pur-
tions within six policy stages (Almond & powell, 1966; pose and design of the phenomena they study. This is a
Dunn, l98l; Jones, 1977; Wirr & Mitchell, 1982). To arrive fallacy called teleologt Fourth, researches assume that
at the 14 media functions in the policy process, Fisher the methodology is tried and proven, when in fact models
adapted Lambeth's (1978; see also Fico, 1984) l0 media of analysis ae often misunderstood and misconstrued.
functions. Within Stage l, problem identification and artic- Finally, researchers have allowed bias to seep into thei
ulation, were found two media functions: (l) identification work. Unintentionally they have written evaluative
ofproblems by media and (2) relaying ofproblems to the approaches into thefu analysis, thus raising questions
public. Within Stage 2, polioy recommendation and aggre- about obj ectivity.
gation, the media were found to function in three ways: Shuctlrral functionalism is a synonym for scientifc
(3) identification of groups and proposals, (4) identifica- analy in general and as such has existed long before the
tion of policymaker proposals, and (5) media suggestions adoption of the name structutal functionls in the social
of content. In Stage 3, policy decision and adoption, the sciences. In the biological sciences, for example, the study
media functioned by (6) setting the tempo of decision of structure and funotion has a long history. Shuctural
making, (7) recommending how to vote, and (8) informing functionalism analysis consists of nothing more than stat-
the public of content. Within Stage 4, policy implementa- ing empirical questions in one of the following forms or
tion, the media functioned by (9) desuibing administmtion some combination of them: (a) What observable unifor-
and (10) alerting the public to problems. Within Stage 5, mities (or pattems) exist in the phenomenon under study?
policy evaluation, were found the media functions of (b) What conditions result because of the phenomenon?
(l l) evaluating effotiveness and (12) reacting to policy. (c) What processes occur as a tesult ofthe conditions? The
Finall within Stage 6, policy resolution or change, were first question asks: What structures are involved? The sec-
found the media functions of (13) stimulating review and ond: What functions have resulted because of the struc-
(14) proposing ohange o termination. tures? Asked in the opposite direction, different results
In his study of lawmakes' use of repofers, Lambeth could occur: What functions exist? What structures result
found that reporters were more influential in the five func- ftom the functions?
tions involving their potential impact in transmitting infor-
mation o the public than in the functions involving
Functon and Stnrcture
personal or professional influence in the legislative setting.
Fisher (1991; Fisher & Soemarsono, 2008) used conent Another problem, according to Levy (1968), is that the
analysis in his study of mass media fi.nctions to determine general concept of struohrre has many diffeent referents,
the role of the media in inforrning or persuading the pub- in both the biologicat and the social sciences. Joseph
lic and policymakers. Fisher confirmed Lambeth's finding Woodger (1948) in biology and Merton (t968) in the
that reporters are more influential in functions involving social sciences have pointed to the abundance of referents
hansmittal of information to the public and less important given to the tm. lunction. This has led o a lot of confu-
in functions involving personal and professional influence sion. Much of the literature is preoccupied with function,
in the legislative setting. In addition, the study seemed to whereas shuchne has been discussed less, Function may
bear out Lambeth's conolusions that the impact of the be defined as any condition or state of affairs resulting
press on eleotd offioials is low to moderate. from an operation of a unit of the type under consideration
Fisher (1991) provides an example of the relationship in terms ofstruchue. In the biological sense, the unit is an
among systms, struch[es, and funotions. While the policy organism or subsystem of an oganism. ln the social sci-
sages are nctions in the political system, they also pro- ences, the unit is usually a set of one or more persons
vide shuchue for the media functions. The first two provide (actors). Structure may be defined as pattem o observable
input frrnctions in the political system. The next is a process uniformity in terms ofthe action or operation taking place.
finction. The last thee serve as output functions. In the social sciences, the focus ofanalysis has been on the
78 o COMPRATIVE POLITICS

structure ofsocieties and other social systems or the struc- misplced concreteness). For example, the tetms economy
tures (pattems) of actions in geneml. ad poliry cannot occupy the same position in system
Classification of functions or shuotures depends partly analysis as the term family. Famly is an example of a con-
on point of view. What is function from one point of view crete structre, as are business firms, govemments, and
may be stmcture fiom another. Levy (1968) gave examples societies. In concrete strucfies, the units are capable of
of this confusion. The manufacture of automobiles is pro- physical separation from other units of the same sort, and
duotion from the point of view of the automobile user but membership is easily defined. I analytic stntctures, no
consumption from the point of view of the steelmaker. concrete separation of rmits is possible. For example, no
Functions in this sense are pattems or shuctutes or have social system is without economic and political structures
important structued atterned) aspects, and all structres (Lery, 1968).
are the results of operations in terms of other structures, so
they are in fact functions. The politeness of children may Institutions, lyaditional Structurcs,
be consideed a structure of their behavior or a function in and Upian Struclures
terms of the structures (pattems) of prenting.
Although these terms are sometimes used interchange-
ably, they refer to different types ofstructures. Institutions
Requisites and Prerequisites
are structures with normative pattems with which confor-
Functional and structural requisites are useful in the mity is expected, and failure to conform is sanotioned or
analysis of any unit . Afunctional requlte may be defined met with indignation. The shucture becomes a requisite of
as "a generalized condition necessary for the maintenance the system. The structe does not change without
ofthe type ofunit under considention" (Levy, l98, p. 23). destroying the structural requisite. For example, age and
Funotional requisites respond to the question: What must role are tied ogether in all societies. If the requisite age
be done to maintain the system at the level under consid- changes for cefain roles or functions, thc structure would
eration? A functional requisite exists if its removal (or also change.
absence) results in the dissolution ofthe unt or the change Traditions arc institulionalized as the structure is per-
of one of its sfuctural elements. petuated to the extent that ohanges in functions do not have
A structurol requisite ray be defined as a pattem of an effect on the structure. Tradition is a double institution,
action (or operation) necessary for the continued existence according to Levy (1968): "The structure concemed is an
of the unit (Levy, 1968). To discover structural requisites, institution and the perpetuation of the struotuIe is also an
ask: What structures must be present so that operations will institution" (p. 27). Important haditions may vary in con-
esult in the functional requisites for the unit? Functional formity and sanctions. The hadition of driving on the
requisites ans.rer the question: What must be done? right-hand side of the road would not have the same level
Shuctural requisites are ans\te to the question: How must ofsanctions as the tradition against incest.
what must be done be done? Utopin struclures, although they may not be institu-
According to Levy (1968), structural-functional requi- tionalized, still require adherence as institutional ideals
site analysis includes the following steps: (a) Define the (Levy, 1968). The principle "Love t neighbor as thyself'
unit ofphenomena to be studied, (b) discover the setting, is an ideal that is institutionalized in some sooial contexts.
(c) discover the general conditions (or functional requi- Its perpetuation is also institutionalized. Utopian structwes
sites) that must be met ifthe unit is to persist in its setting allow the teaching of societal norms and the perpetuation
with change or alteration of structures, and (d) discover ofstructures,
what structures must be present to maintin the system.
Functional and structural prerequisites must preexist if Ideal nd Aclual Structures
a unit is to come into existence. Sometimes the requisites
and prerequisites may be similar or identical. On the other Members ofa sooiety establish ideal struotures to deter-
hand, the requisites and prerequisites may not coincide. mine how they should behave, whereas actual structues
For example, the structures that must be maintained in are pattems of how they do behave. Although sometimes
order for the United States to continue as a highly mod- the ideal and the actual coinoide, more often they do not fit
emized society are not the same as those that have to pre- perfectly. This difference in fit causes shess in the social
exist for Nigeria to become highly modernized. Howeve system. Only with perfect knowledge and perfeot motiva-
the structures may be similar if one looks at the United tion would there be a perfect fit between the ideal and the
States at the beginning ofthe l9th century @evy, 1968). actual skuctures.

Concrete and Analylic St ltctures Criticisms of Structural Functionalism

Failure to distinguish between concrete and analytic Critics of structural functionalism view it as "a transla-
structures may result in lhe fllacy of rei/calon (or tion of Anglo-American political norms in methodological
 Syslefis Theory atd Sftuclarl Functotlht . '19

terminology" (Susser, 1992, p. 207\. Structual fu nctional- these theories, the approach is still alive and well
ism may be in decline as a methodological approach for (Chamock,2009; Fisher & Soemarsono, 2008; Fisk &
the study ofpolitics; however, it leaves a set of terms that Malamud, 2009; Mohamed, 2007; Scheuerell, 2008).
are still used in political jargon. Some ofthose in the func- Understanding politics requires political syntax, much of
tionalist camp (Merton among them) rejected the notion of which continues to be based on structural functonalism
this deoline. "Much of what was best in the political and systems theory.
research ofan entire generation was couched in its terms"
(Susser, 1992, p. 207).
One ofthe main criticisms ofstructural functionalism is References and Further Readings
that its catsgories were "too undiffeentiated to be of real
help in actual research" (Susse 1992, p. 206). Although Almond, G. A. (1956). Comparative political systems. Journl of
Almond's functional taxonomy has greater specifioity and Poltics, 18,391409.
serviceability than the systems approach, it is seen as not Almond, G.4., & Coleman, J. S. (1960). The poltcs ofthe devel-
much more than a translation of familiar and known phe- oping areas. Princeton, NJ; Princeton University Press.
nomena into blandly broad categories. As such it promotes Almond, G. A., & Powell, G. 8., Jr (1966). Compqtutive poli-
"a terminological rather than an essential transformation in tics: A develop ektal qpproach, Bostoni Little, Brown.
the disoipline" (Susser, 1992, p.206).
Bertalary, L. von. (1956). General system theory. General
Another criticism is related to the methodological
Systems, I, ll0,
Bertalanry, L. von. (1962). General system theory: A critical
appoach used in functionalism. A list of functions is ore-
review. General $tstens, 7, 1-20.
ated deductively and then appropriate structures are iden- Cancian, F. M. (1968). Vaieties of functional analysis. In
tified. In some cases, this approach leads to "empirical D. L. Sills (Ed.), lzterri tionl encyclopedia ofsocial sci-
contortions" to satisfu the framework. This criticism ences (Yol.5, pp.29 4l). New Yok: Macmillan.
applies to much academic research, leaving the reseatcher, Chamock, G. (2009, Summer). Why do institutions matte? Global
rather than the approach, responsible for assuring research competitiveness and the politics ofpolicies in Latin Ameica.
validity. Captal & Class, 3J(98), 67. Retrieved August 5, 2009, om
A final criticism, according to Susser (1992), is that http://fi nd. galegroup.cor,/gtxlstat.do?podId=AONE
functionalism "harbors an ideological slant" . 207) that Cose, L. A. (1975). fe idea ofsocial strucnre: Ppers in honor

sustains existing structures. It describes what exists rather of Robert K. Meon. New York: Hacourt Brace
Jovanovich.
than what ought to be, thus maintaining the status quo.
Deutsch, K. W, (1963). The nemes o governntent. New Yok:
As if anticipating this criticism, Almond and Powell
Free Press.
(1966) responded to the criticism that functional-systems
Dunn, W. N. (1981). Publc polcy analysis: An ntrcduction.
theories imply "an equilibrium or harmony of parts" and Englet ood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
'that they have a sttic or conservative bias" . l2). Easton, D. (1953). The political system: An nquiry nto the state
Politioal systems are not necessarily harmonious or stable, of political scence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
they wrote, but interdependent. The task of political sci- Easton, D. (1957). An approach to the analysis of political sys-
ence eseaoh is "to ascertain how change in any one ofthe tems. World Poltics, 9,383400.
partr of a political system affects other parts and the Easton, D. (1965a). A framework for polticl qnalysis.
whole" (p. l3). They built political development into their Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
approach to the study of systems. They look at political Easton, D. ( l95b).1 systems analyss ofpolitcal le. Newyork:-
Wiley.
systems "as whole entities shaping and being shaped by
Flston, D. (1960. Categories for the systems analysis ofpolitics, In
their environments" (p. l4). To understand the processes
D. Easn (Ed.), Varietes of polticl thery (tp. 143-154).
of politioal development, they examine the interaction of
Englewood Clifs, NJ: Prentice l{all.
the political system with its domestic and intemational Fico, F. (1984). How lawmakers se porters: Differences in
environments. specialization and goals. Journlism Qurterly, 6l(4),
793-800, 82t .
Fisher, J. R. (1991). News media fi.nctions in policymaking.
Conclusion Canadian Iournl of Communcatons, 16(l), 139-145.
Retieved Ap l 3, 2009, fom http://wwn.cjc-online.cal
The study ofshuctuial functionalism and systems theory had index.php/joumayarticle/vie5 89/495
its heyday with the works of Easton (who examined political Fisher, J. R., & Soemarsono, A. (2008). Mass media impact on
post-secondary policy making: A case study of a failed
systems), Merton (noted for his study of social sFucture),
megef attempt. Compe t tor Forum, 6(l), 9 6-102.
and Alnond and Coleman (who developed a taxonomy of
Fisk, C. L., & Malamud, D. C. (2009). The NLRB in administra-
political functions within political systems). A majority of
tive law exile: Problems with its shucture and function and
political studies from that period used systems theory and
suggestions for refom. Dulre Lqw Journal, 58(8), 2013-2085.
skuctual functionalism as their framework (Susser, 1992). Retrieved August 5, 2009, fom http;//find.galegroup.com/
While few researchers oday claim a framework based on gPJstart.do?prodld=AONE
80 e COMPARATIVE POLITICS

Jones, C. O. (1977). ,4 n intoduction to the stu ofpublic policy Rapoport, A. ( I 966). Some system approaches o political theory In
(2nd ed.). Boston: Duxbury. D. Easton (Ed.), yarieties o politcdl theory (pp. 129-142).
Lamboth, E. B, (1978). Prceived influence of the press on Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentic Hall.
nergy policy making. Journalism Quarterly, 55(l), Rapoport, A. (1968). General systems theory.I D. L. Sils (Ed.),
n-r',72. Intemotonql encyclopedia of the social scences NoL 5,
L,evy,M. J. (1968). Stucturl-functional analysis. In D. L. Sills pp. 452-457). Nev/ Yok: Macmillan.
(d.), Internqtionql encyclopedia of the sociol sciences Scheuerell, S. K (2008). Using the Intemet to lem about the influ-
(Vol. 5, pp. 2l-29). New York: Macmillan. ence ofmoney in poltics. Sociql Education, 72(3), 152-155.
Meron, R, K. (1968), theory and social structule. New Yok: Smith, M. G. (1966). A structural approach to compative
^9oc,4l
Fee Press. politics. In D. Easton (Ed.), Yarieties of political theory
Michell, W. C. (1962). The Anericqn polity: A socsl snd cal- p. I l3-128). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentic Hall.
turql interpleloton, New Yok: Fee Press. S,rsse\B. (1992). Apptooches to the st dy opolitcr. New York:
Mitcbell, W C. (1968). Political systems. In D. L. Sills (Ed.), Macmillan,
Internationl encyclopedq of the socisl sciences NoL 5, Wirt, F. M., & Mitchell, D. E. (1982). Social scienc and cduca-
pp. 473-4?9). New Yok: Macmillan. tional eform; The political uses of social research,
Mohamd, J. (2007). Kinship and contact in Somali politics. Educational Adminstraton QLq erly, /8(4), l-16.
Africa, 77(2),22249. Woodger, J. H. (1948). Biologcal principles: A crtcql stu.
Parsons, T. (1951). The social syste,n, Clencoe, lL: Frce Press. London: Routledge.