METHODS AND APPROACHES

IN COMPARATIVE POLITICAL

METHODS AND APPROACHES IN COMPARATIVE POLITICAL ANALYSIS

ANALYSIS
B.A. (HONS.) POLITICAL SCIENCE
SEMESTER-II
DSC-5
As per the UGCF - 2022 and National Education Policy 2020

DSC-5

DEPARTMENT OF DISTANCE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF DISTANCE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION
CAMPUS OF OPEN LEARNING, SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING CAMPUS OF OPEN LEARNING, SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

Editorial Board
Dr. Shakti Pradayani Rout
Dr. Shambhu Nath Dubey
Dr. Mangal Deo

Content Writers
Dr. Abhishek Choudhary, Bhagyanagar Vineeth Srivatsava,
Dr. Kamal Kumar, Yerramadasu Udaykumar, Shikha Jaiswal,
Vaishali Mann, Garima Sharma, Dr. Latika Bishnoi

Academic Coordinator
Deekshant Awasthi

© Department of Distance and Continuing Education

ISBN: 978-81-19169-32-0

E-mail: [email protected]
[email protected]

Published by:
Department of Distance and Continuing Education
Campus of Open Learning, School of Open Learning,
University of Delhi, Delhi-110 007

Printed by:
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

Reviewer
Mr. Shaitan Singh

This Study Material is duly recommended in the meeting of Standing Committee held
on 08/05/2023 and approved in Academic Council meeting held on 26/05/2023 Vide
item no. 1014 and subsequently Executive Council Meeting held on 09/06/2023 vide
item no. 14 {14-1(14-1-11)}

 Unit-I and unit-II from CBCS, remaining Units have been written afresh.
 Corrections/Modifications/Suggestions proposed by Statutory Body,
DU/Stakeholder/s in the Self Learning Material (SLM) will be incorporated in the
next edition. However, these corrections/modifications/suggestions will be uploaded
on the website https://sol.du.ac.in. Any feedback or suggestions can be sent to
the email- [email protected]

Printed at: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. Plot 20/4, Site-IV, Industrial Area Sahibabad, Ghaziabad - 201 010 (2100 Copies)

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

SYLLABUS
Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis
Syllabus Mapping

Unit I: Understanding Comparative Politics Lesson 1: Understanding Comparative

(a) Nature and Scope Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to
(b) Why Compare Compare, Understanding Comparative
(c) Understanding Comparative Method: How to Compare Method: How to Compare Countries:
Countries: Large n, Small n, Single Countries Studies Large n, Small n, Single Countries
(d) Going beyond Eurocentrism Studies, and Going beyond
Eurocentrism
(Pages 3-21)

Unit II: Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics Lesson 2: Approaches to Studying

(a) Institutional Approach, System Approach, Structural- Comparative Politics: Institutional
Functional Approach Approach, System Approach,
(b) Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics Political Structural-Functional Approach
Culture Approach (Pages 25-40);
(c) New Institutionalism Lesson 3: Approaches to Studying
Comparative Politics: Political Culture
Approach
(Pages 41-55);
Lesson 4: New Institutionalism
(Pages 57-70)

Unit III: Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism Lesson 5: Traditional and Neo-

(a) Historical Institutionalism Institutionalism: Historical
(b) Rational Choice Theory Institutionalism, Rational Choice
(c) Sociological Institutionalism Theory and Sociological
Institutionalism
(Pages 73-94)

Unit IV: Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Lesson 6: Political Culture: Approaches
Politics to the Study of Comparative Politics -
(a) Civic Culture Civic Culture, Subculture, Hegemony,
(b) Subculture Post Materialism, and Social Capital
(c) Hegemony (Pages 97-111)
(d) Post Materialism
(e) Social Capital

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

Unit V: Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy Lesson 7: Approaches to Studying
(a) Underdevelopment Comparative Politics: Political Economy
(b) Dependency - Underdevelopment,
(c) Modernisation Dependency, Modernization, and
(d) World System Theory World System Theory
(Pages 115-132)

Unit VI: Gendering Comparative Politics Lesson 8: Gendering Comparative

(a) The Gender Lacuna in Comparative Politics Politics - The Gender
(b) Political Representation: Women in Government and Politics Lacuna in Comparative Politics,
Political Representation: Women in
Government
and Politics
(Pages 135-150)

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

CONTENTS

Unit I

Lesson 1 Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to Compare,

Understanding Comparative Method: How to Compare Countries: Large n,
Small n, Single Countries Studies, and Going beyond Eurocentrism 3-21

Unit II

Lesson 2 Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach,

System Approach, Structural-Functional Approach 25-40

Lesson 3 Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach 41-55

Lesson 4 New Institutionalism 57-70

Unit III

Lesson 5 Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism,

Rational Choice Theory and Sociological Institutionalism 73-94

Unit IV

Lesson 6 Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - Civic Culture,
Subculture, Hegemony, Post Materialism, and Social Capital 97-111

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

Unit V

Lesson 7 Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics:

Political Economy - Underdevelopment, Dependency,
Modernization, and World System Theory 115-132

Unit VI

Lesson 8 Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in

Comparative Politics, Political Representation:
Women in Government and Politics 135-150

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Unit I

Lesson 1 Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope,

Why to Compare, Understanding Comparative Method:
How to Compare Countries: Large n, Small n, Single
Countries Studies, and Going beyond Eurocentrism
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

LESSON 1 NOTES

UNDERSTANDING COMPARATIVE POLITICS:

NATURE AND SCOPE, WHY TO COMPARE,
UNDERSTANDING COMPARATIVE METHOD: HOW
TO COMPARE COUNTRIES: LARGE N, SMALL N,
SINGLE COUNTRIES STUDIES, AND GOING
BEYOND EUROCENTRISM
Dr. Abhishek Choudhary
Assistant Professor,
Department of Political Science, DU
Structure

1.1 Learning Objectives

1.2 Introduction
1.3 Nature and Scope of Comparative Politics
1.3.1 Nature of Comparative Politics
1.3.2 Scope of Comparative Politics
1.4 Why to Compare?
1.5 Methods of Comparison
1.6 Going beyond Eurocentrism
1.7 Summary
1.8 Self - Assessment Questions
1.9 References

1.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this lesson, the students will be able to understand:

 The nature and scope of Comparative politics.
 Reasons for comparison. Self-Instructional
Material 3

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES  The various methods and approaches to compare.

 The meaning of Eurocentrism.
 Why you need to go beyond eurocentrism.

1.2 INTRODUCTION

This lesson has three-fold objective. Firstly, it provides an overview of the sub-discipline
of comparative politics and seeks to examine its nature and scope. Secondly, it provides
an understanding about the rationale for comparing and unpacking the methods of
comparison. Finally, it addresses the problem of Eurocentrism and provides a way out
of the trap.
Before examining these, it would be pertinent to understand what comparative
politics means. Scholars have understood comparative politics as one of the three
main subfields of political science, the other two being political theory and international
relations. Comparative politics has been defined in several ways. Some prominent
definitions worth attention are as follows:
Jean Blondel (1999) defines comparative politics as being concerned with
“simultaneous or successive examination of two or more political systems”. For Hague,
Harrop and McComrick (2016: 12), comparative politics is the “systematic study of
government and politics in different countries, designed to better understand them by
drawing out their contrasts and similarities.” However, comparative politics is more
than just identifying similarities and differences. Comparison allows one to go beyond
“identifying similarities and differences” to “ultimately study political phenomena in a
larger framework of relationships” (Mohanty 1975). This approach helps in deepening
ones understanding of given political phenomenon and therefore allows one to be in a
position to have a better explanation. It would help to deepen your understanding and
broaden the levels of answering and explaining political phenomena.

Self-Instructional
4 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

NOTES
1.3 NATURE AND SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE
POLITICS

A major definitional aspect relates to the question: what is to be compared? On one

hand, if two things are entirely different, there is no point of comparison. On the other
hand, if two things are entirely same, comparison would not be useful either. One
important aspect is to specify “functional equivalence” between concepts or indicators
(Dogan and Pelassy 1990). This aspect is based on two major ideas. First idea is that
the “different structures may perform the same function”. The second idea is that the
“same structure may perform several different functions” (Dogan and Pelassy 1990).
By arguing in favour of functional equivalence, it is asserted that instead of looking at
institutional similarity, one can assess the roles and functions performed by various
institutions within and outside the politics. This idea has been championed by scholars
who fall under the category of ‘functionalists’. In simple terms, it is the performance of
functions and the role played by different organs of the society that matters. This may
include non-political institutions as well. No institution can be attributed to a single
function exclusively. Similarly, no institution can be limited to a single function too. For
instance, the military may perform roles much more than that of securing the borders in
some states, or the function of the president may vary drastically in two different
countries.

1.3.1 Nature of Comparative Politics

Daniel Caramani (2011) seeks to provide answer to “what” is being compared in

comparative politics. He argues that “national political systems” are the main cases
that are compared as they happen to be the most important political units in world
politics. However, they are “not the only cases” that are analysed by comparative
politics (Caramani 2011: 5). For instance, comparative politics can analyse “sub-
national regional political systems” like the states or regions of India. Or, they can
analyse “supranational units” like regions (comprising more than one country, like
West Asia), political systems of empires (like Roman, Ottoman, Mughal, etc.),
international or regional organizations (like SAARC, EU, NATO, etc.), and types
Self-Instructional
Material 5

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES of political systems (democratic versus authoritarian, etc.) (Caramani 2011: 5).
Comparative political analysis can also compare “single elements or components”.
This may include a comparison of party systems, electoral systems, structures of various
institutions, policies, etc.
In general terms, comparative politics seeks to analyse and compare the political
systems operating in various societies. It also compares units within and beyond states.
With its focus on comparison and analysis, it takes into account political activity, political
processes as well as the political power in various political systems.
The discipline of comparative politics has three traditions (Caramani 2011):
1. Oriented towards the study of single countries
2. Methodological
3. Analytical
The first tradition is oriented towards the study of single countries. It follows the
initial inclination of American comparativists who focused on the study of political
systems outside of the US. This tradition reflects the Anglo-Saxon dominance over the
subject and studied foreign countries as ‘others’. This tradition often focusses on
countries in isolation without actually engaging in comparison. It is limited to providing
detailed description of a single case. Despite the criticism of this tradition, major
contributions in the field of comparative politics stem from detailed descriptive study
of single countries.
The second tradition seeks to establish rules and standards for comparison. It
focusses on the ways in which a better reservoir of comparative information, explanation,
and prediction can be created. In this sense, comparative method is a “method of
discovering empirical relationships among variables” (Lijphart 1971). Thus,
‘comparative method’ is one of the traditions within comparative politics that is different
from descriptive and analytical traditions. By focusing on rules and standards, this
tradition provides starting point for analysis of countries or groups of countries.
The third tradition is analytical and provides a combination of empirical description
with this method. Most of the work that nowadays are categorised as ‘works of
comparative politics’ falls under this tradition. Comparative studies of political parties,
regime types, social movements, etc. in two or more countries are a few examples of
Self-Instructional this body of literature. The works are mainly concerned with identifying and explaining
6 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

“differences and similarities between countries” and their “institutions, actors, and NOTES
processes” by using the method of “systematic comparison” of common phenomenon
(Caramani 2011: 4).

1.3.2 Scope of Comparative Politics

The discipline of comparative politics has been criticised on different levels. It has
been considered as Eurocentric implying that the ‘western model’ is seen as better
than the rest of the world. This sort of parochialism leads to the perpetuation of the
hegemonic nature of a particular system. This further leads to the ‘self’ versus ‘other’
bias. Due to this, the ‘self’ gets defined in relation to the ‘other’. The first tradition
mentioned above is subjected to this criticism. Even the third tradition succumbs to
this Eurocentric bias and the ‘non-west’ is compared in a manner that presents the
west as better and superior.
Roy C. Macridis (1955) in his seminal essay identified certain limitations of the
traditional approach. First, it has been called as ‘essentially noncomparative’ implying
that the reference point is the institutional structure of a given country. It has been
alleged that single case study is being passed as a comparative study. He further alleged
that the traditional approach is more descriptive and less analytical. This criticism
stems from the fact that the historical and legalistic approaches have their limitations.
The historical approach focusses on studying the “origins and growth” of certain
institutions (Macridis 1955: 17). In doing so, it does not make any effort towards
evolving any analytical scheme. Thus, the focus stays limited on the chronology of
events within a country and the chosen institution of that country. The legalistic approach
focusses primarily on the study of powers of different branches of the government. It
does not try to analyse the factors that shape particular forms of power in specific
ways. Thus, they fail to provide any “general frame of reference” that can be used in a
truly comparative sense (Macridis 1955: 18).
Second, Macridis considers the traditional approach as ‘essentially parochial’.
This critique is related to the undue focus on institutions of the Western European
countries. Such a focus significantly limited the scope of comparative politics and
rendered other regime types as less important. Third, Macridis called the approach as
‘essentially static’. This implied that comparative politics ignored the ever changing
factors that leads to change and growth. Finally, he called the approach as ‘essentially Self-Instructional
Material 7

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES monographic’ implying that the study remained focused on political institutions of a
given system. It meant that the focus of comparativists remained on individual case
studies. This critique is close to the critique that considers comparative politics as
descriptive and as lacking systematic formulation.
Neera Chandoke (1996) builds up on Macridis’ critique and traces the crisis of
comparative politics. First, the disciple faced a general attack on grand theorization. It
was questioned for removing issues from contextual specificities. It was further accused
of over generalised regularities. The discipline was considered as reductionist. It was
searching for simple variables for the sake of comparison. It ‘reduced’ complex
phenomenon of politics to simple variables that could be compared with ease. The
second indication of crisis stems from the ethnocentric nature of the discipline and
focus on studying the ‘other’ - other societies, other regime types, and other institutions.
The third reason for the crisis of comparative politics is the crisis of nation-state itself.
The usual category of comparison, the state, faced challenges due to external forces
as well as internal autonomy movements.
A set of problems faced by comparative analysis relates to the methodological
dimension. There is often a criticism against any case study for having a “selection
bias” (Landman 2008). The choice of countries to do a comparative study might be
based on the bias of the comparativist. Another problem relates to the emphasis on a
“behavioural approach”. The behavioural approach in social science in general and
comparative politics in particular is related to the tendency to explain social phenomenon
using scientific methods. It was asserted by the behaviouralists that social reality can
be observed, quantified, and generalised. Behaviouralists use methods of sampling,
survey, interview, and statistical analysis to explain social realities.
Example of these problems is the criticism levelled against the seminal work by
Gabriel Almond and Sydney Verba, The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and
Democracy in Five Nations (1963). The study was called ethnocentric as it favoured
consensual democracy as the most stable form. It is further pointed out that political
culture of Mexico was deliberately pitted against the political culture of the United
States to prove that liberal democracies (like the US) are better than one-party systems
(like Mexico during those years). The study was also called an attempt of behaviouralists
to quantify political orientations to categorize countries, ignoring the dynamic nature
Self-Instructional
and contextual specificities of socio-political relations.
8 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

NOTES
1.4 WHY TO COMPARE?

Comparing two or more things is a natural attribute of human behaviour. Whether one
has to choose the subject to study after schools, whether one has to buy clothes,
phones or any other thing, there are constantly involved in comparison. Politics is an
even more important and an ever-evolving domain that requires comparison to equate,
differentiate, and assess various phenomena.
Todd Landman (2008) has identified four reasons for comparison: contextual
description, classification, hypothesis-testing and prediction.

i) Contextual description

It allows political scientists to know what other countries are like (Landman 2008).
This has been the primary objective of comparative politics wherein the focus is on
‘describing the political phenomena and events of a particular country, or group of
countries’ (Landman 2008: 5). It is important as it provides an outside observer to
make sense of a system not entirely known to him/her. This aspect is closer to the first
tradition and provides the comparativists with detailed information about a political
system. While some critics assert that single-country studies cannot be truly considered
comparative, there are benefits of studying a particular country or a group of countries.
For instance, a detailed analysis of political system of United Kingdom provides us
with the information about benefits and limitations of parliamentary system. This can
help us assess other cases where similar - or opposite - systems exist.

ii) Classification

It implies simplifying and organizing information so that it can be easily observed and
categorized (Landman 2008: 5-6). Classification allows grouping of categories that
are not same but have some level of similarity. For example, let us assume two countries
where one has a Parliamentary system while the other has a Presidential system. Both
have very different set of rules. But both can be ‘classified’ as democracies. Thus, the
world of politics is made less complex through classification (Landman 2008: 4).
One of the earliest known comparativists, Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), used the
Self-Instructional
same logic while classifying 158 city-states into six categories: monarchy, aristocracy, Material 9

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES polity, tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. Based on the ‘number of those who rule’
and the forms as good or corrupt, Aristotle’s classification can be summarised through
the following table:
Those who rule
One Few Many
Good Monarchy Aristocracy Polity
Form of Rule (kingship)
Corrupt Tyranny Oligarchy Democracy (mob rule)

Source: Todd Landman (2008), Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics: An Introduction,
New York: Routledge.

In similar way, one of the most prominent work on comparative social revolution,
Theda Skocpol’s States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of
France, Russia and China (1979) provides a classificatory analysis of role of state
structures, international forces, and class relations. She uses this to explain and analyse
the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and the Chinese Revolution.

iii) Hypothesis-testing

After describing and classifying information, the next logical step is to understand the
factors that explains what has been described and classified. This aspect has been
called as ‘hypothesis testing’ and implies the search for factors so that better theories
could be built. This aspect is closer to the second tradition of comparative politics
which is focused on analysis and seeks to establish relation among variables.
Comparative research is a focus on analytical relationships among variables
validated by social science, a focus that is modified by differences in the context in
which we observe and measure those variables. Arend Lijphart claims that comparison
helps in testing “hypothesized empirical relationships among variables” (Lijphart 1971).
Comparative analysis also leads to accumulation of more information that helps in
having a better and more complete explanatory theory. So, when comparing countries,
testing hypothesis allows the accumulation of a larger pool of information and improves
ones knowledge about the world.
Self-Instructional
10 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

iv) Prediction NOTES

Comparison of countries and the generalizations based on such comparison allows

one to ‘predict’ likely outcomes. The likely outcomes in other countries that are not
included in the original comparison can be made based on a robust theory. Also,
prediction can be made about outcomes in the future on the basis of certain factors
and conditions. Predictability is an excellent attribute of a good theory and it is asserted
that a ‘good theory’ is able to predict outcomes with better accuracy.
Other than these four reasons, comparison provides us perspective to understand
the less known political systems. It also helps to understand the differences in outcome
in different socio-political settings. It also helps in understanding as to why countries
develop the way they do and why they are ruled the way they are.
Hague, Harrop and McComrick (2016) identify two major purposes of
comparative politics:
a) It broadens one’s understanding of the political world.
b) It helps in predicting political outcomes. .
Arguing on similar lines, Newton and Van Deth (2010) provide three important
reasons for studying comparative politics:
a) One cannot understand one’s own country without the knowledge of
others.
b) One cannot understand other countries without knowing the background,
institutions, and history of other countries.
c) One cannot arrive at valid generalisations about government and politics
without the comparative method.
Thus, it can be argued that describing, analysing, predicting, and generalizing
are four major attributes of comparative politics that makes it an important aspect of
broader political analysis.

Self-Instructional
Material 11

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
1.5 METHODS OF COMPARISON

Kopstein and Lichbach (2005) have argued that focussing on ‘interests, identities, and
institutions’ are three ways that provide different paths of doing comparison. These
variables have an impact on how political systems operate.

a) Focus on Interest

Some comparativists focus on interests. For them, the material or interest of people is
what matter the most. People decide on the basis of rational calculations and organize
politically in order to maximize their interest. They support a regime type that ‘maximizes
their life chances’ (Kopstein and Lichbach 2005). For instance, a group of people
may organize against a regime type or support it purely based on rational calculations.
The calculations are interest based and therefore, it may be possible that a particular
regime type is supported in a particular society but the same may be opposed in
another social setting. However, an undue focus on interest may be misleading. The
next two paths downplay the relevance of interests and consider the interest being
shaped by identities or institutions.

b) Focus on Identities

Some comparativists consider identity as the most important factor. They argue that
there are no objective interests and one’s interest is defined by one’s identity. Two
most common forms of identities are religion and ethnicity (Kopstein and Lichbach
2005). People or groups of people define their interests in terms of their identity. A
simple example could be religious support to a theocratic regime. Another example
could be the rise of caste based or religion based parties in India where the support to
a particular political party is based primarily on identity. While some identities are
based on birth and place, modern societies also generate newer identities. For example,
organizing for issues like gender and environment leads to the creation of newer identities.
Recent US elections (2020) showed that how historical identities and newer identities
interact and shape people’s choices.

Self-Instructional
12 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

c) Focus on Institutions NOTES

Yet another group of comparativists argue that neither material interests, nor identities
determine how the politics of a country works. For them, the rules and procedures
embedded in institutions dictate the way power operates and countries work (Kopstein
and Lichbach 2005). Institutions shape the working of a country either directly or
indirectly. In particular, democracies have a diverse and complex set of institutions that
define how a country would shape up. For example, the institutionalised electoral
system of the United States is based on a ‘first-past-the-post’ system. On the other
hand, Germany has a ‘proportional representation’ electoral system. Both the countries
are democratic but the political life and political culture of both democracies vary -
and one major factor for this variation in the difference in institutions. Comparativists
who tend to focus on institutions, try to explain variation in outcomes on the basis of
variation in institutions. The aspect of ‘functional equivalence’ is relevant here as same
institutions may perform different functions and different institutions may perform same
functions.
Comparativists have proceeded in their task by focusing on one or a mix of the
three ways mentioned above. While one of the ‘ways’ may have its limitation, a mix of
more than one provides a broader understanding of the issues.
A different way to approach the question “how to compare” has been answered
by political philosopher James Stuart Mill. He provides five strategies for undertaking
comparison (Finn 2011):
a) Method of agreement: Two or more instances of an event (effect) are
compared to see what they have in common. That commonality is identified
as the cause.
b) Method of difference: Two or more instances of an event (effect) are
compared to see what they all do not have in common. If they have all but
one thing in common, that one thing is identified as the cause.
c) Joint method of agreement and difference: It is a combination of the
methods of agreement and difference. The joint method looks for a single
commonality among two or more instances of an event, and it further
looks for a common absence of that possible cause.
Self-Instructional
Material 13

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES d) Method of residues: All known causes of a complex set of events are
subtracted and whatever is left is said to be the cause.
e) Method of concomitant variations: Correlations between varying events
are sought, that is, correspondence in variations between two sets of
objects, events, or data.
Of these, the ‘joint method of agreement and difference’ is relevant to comparative
politics as it combines the method of agreement and difference. It seeks to look for a
single commonality among two or more instances of an event and common absence of
a possible cause (Finn 2011). J.S. Mill’s ‘method of difference’ is also known as the
“most similar system design”. It is used in comparing similar cases having dependent
variables. His ‘method of similarity’ is also known as the “most different systems design”
(Black 1966). It is employed to compare dissimilar cases having independent variables.
However, while comparing, one should be careful about what to compare and how to
compare. There is a much greater value in comparing events and institutions that are
situated in a similar time frame than those that are widely separated in time. The
comparison of societies or smaller groups that are concerned with reasonably similar
problems are more likely to lead to satisfactory conclusions than comparisons between
societies existing many centuries apart (Black 1966).
Thus, comparative research designs can either focus on similarities or on
differences (Caramani 2011). Daniel Caramani (2011) argues that it would not be
correct to say that comparative politics relies on a specific method. This is because
different methods could be employed based on the differences in number of cases
chosen, type of data analysis used and time period under study. Thus, the research
method would depend on question that the researcher is asking.
Another reason is that there can be different dimension under comparison.
Therefore, a single method will not be useful. The comparison can be (a) spatial or
cross-sectional, meaning that two political systems are compared as a cross section.
For example, comparison of federal systems of India and Canada. It can be (b)
longitudinal, meaning that institutions and systems could be compared across time.
For example, comparison of the phase of congress system in India with the phase of
coalitional politics. It can be (c) functional or cross-organizational, meaning that the

Self-Instructional
14 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

object of study is not territorially different but can be within a given political system. NOTES
For example, comparison of government policies related to expenditure on military
and education.

1.6 GOING BEYOND EUROCENTRISM

As discussed in the section 1.3.2 on ‘scope comparative politics’, the discipline faces
the charge of being parochial and Eurocentric. There are methodological problems,
and it has been alleged that comparative politics focusses on the “how” but ignores the
“what” of the problem (Lijphart 1971). The Eurocentric nature of the discipline limited
its focus on Great Britain, France, Germany and the Soviet Union.
Macridis’s critique of the discipline as parochial and Eurocentric did challenge
the contours but the efforts to redefine the discipline was still based on a deeply
entrenched bias. Thus, by addressing the “first crisis of the discipline”, a “second
crisis” was invited (Chandhoke 1996). The efforts to expand the scope of the discipline
led to limiting of the focus on the American and Western political systems and institutions.
It was based on the same worldview that ignored the worldviews of others. This was
the Eurocentrism of the discipline which either (a) focused entirely on the West and
ignored the rest of the world, or (b) even when any part of the rest of the world was
studied/compared, it was considered ‘less civilized’, ‘exotic’, ‘different’ and ‘inferior’
than the European and American models. Eurocentrism implies this superiority and
bias in favour of the civilization, culture and race of the West.
A “third world perspective” began to emerge during 1940s and 1950s but it
remained limited mostly to the Latin American experience. One of the earliest proponents
of this approach was Paul Baran who spearheaded the critique of modernization theory
from a Neo-Marxist perspective. Broadly called the ‘dependency perspective’, the
ideas represented ‘voices from the periphery’ that ‘challenged the intellectual hegemony
of the American modernization school’ (So 1990). Before going into the critique, it
would be useful to look at some major theories of growth and modernization.

Self-Instructional
Material 15

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
Major Theories of Growth and Modernization
Paul Rosenstein-Rodan (1943) gave the theory of ‘big push’. He argued in
favour of industrial sector and advocated moving away from agricultural sector.
He favoured the industrial sector as it would generate greater levels of capital
setting a self-perpetuating motion of growth.
Ragnar Nurkse (1953) came up with the notion that is better known as the
‘trickle-down effect’. He argued that poor do not save and therefore investment
in industries was needed to generate capital. Rich needed to grow, save and
invest further and the fruits of capital will eventually trickle-down to the poor
sections as well.
Simon Kuznets (1955) argued that capitalist development would in fact lead to
economic inequality in short run. But it would eventually lead to a more equitable
and prosperous society. In Indian context, V.M. Dandekar and N. Rath (1971)
argued that a higher rate of growth was better than a lower rate of growth for all
social groups, except for the poorest 10 percent. Thus, they challenged the
effectiveness of the trickle-down effect and argued for a ‘basic needs strategy’.
They argued that from the viewpoint of the poor, fair distribution of growth is
more important than general growth.
W. Arthur Lewis (1954) began his argument by looking at a two-sector model -
the capitalist sector and the subsistence sector. While the capitalist sector has
reproducible capital and is more productive, the subsistence sector has low level
of productivity. With low rate of savings, the subsistence sector lacks accumulation
of capital that can be reproduced. Therefore, Lewis argued for emphasizing the
capitalist sector for growth.
W.W. Rostow (1960) provided an ideological challenge to socialist models of
development by presenting his “Stages of Economic Growth”. Rostow divided
the process of development into five stages: (i) the traditional society; (ii) the
establishment of the preconditions for take-off; (iii) the take-off stage; (iv) the
drive to maturity; and (v) the epoque of high mass consumption. For the second
stage, he emphasized the need to focus on specific growth sectors that would
function as engines for economic growth and lead to establishment of such
political, social and institutional frameworks that would utilize the potential in
modern sector.
For more details on theories of growth and modernization, See John Martinussen
(1997), Society, State and Market: A guide to competing theories of development,
London: Zed Books Ltd, chapter 5 and Alvin Y. So (1990), Social Change and
Development: Modernization, Dependency and World System Theories, Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Self-Instructional
16 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

Paul Baran (1966) used Marxist theory of surplus and sought to focus on NOTES
internal conditions of backward economies. Baran identified four classes that had
narrow self-interest and had no interest in promoting industrialization. These four classes
- the feudal aristocracy, the moneylenders, the merchants and the foreign capitalists
appropriated the surplus. Therefore, it was necessary to have extensive state intervention
to promote nationally-controlled industrialization (Martinussen 1997: 87). It was Baran’s
ideas that influenced later dependency theorists like A.G. Frank, Samir Amin and
Arghiri Emmanuel to provide a third world perspective.
Andre Gunder Frank (1967) provided the idea of “Development of
Underdevelopment”. According to Frank, the Third World could never follow the
path taken by the West because of the differences in experience (So 1990: 96). The
West did not experience colonialism while most of the Third World countries are
former colonies of the West. Thus, Frank dismissed the ‘internal explanation’ of the
modernization school and emphasizes the ‘external explanation’. In simple words, the
backwardness of the Third World was not due to feudalism or aristocracy but was an
outcome of the colonial experience and foreign domination.
A.G. Frank formulated a “metropolis-satellite model” to explain the
underdevelopment of the Third World. Colonialism created a link between the metropole
(or the colonisers) and the satellites (or the colony) in a way that to an unequal relation
of trade. All the surplus was appropriated by the metropole leaving the satellite poor.
The local bourgeoise also contributed to this underdevelopment by draining the surplus
outside the satellite, not using it for investment and internal development, and keeping
the international inequality in place. Thus, what occurred was the development of
underdevelopment due to the link with world market. Only way out of this vicious
cycle was to delink from the world market (So 1990).
Samir Amin (1976) provided the concept of ‘Centre and Periphery’. Unlike
Frank, who focused on trade and exchange relations, Amin was more concerned with
“conditions and relations of production” (Martinussen 1997). Amin provided two ideal-
type societal models - the autocentric economy and the peripheral economy. The
autocentric economy is self-reliant but there is lack of self-sufficiency. It relies on
extensive international trade. On the other hand, the peripheral economy has an
“overdeveloped export sector” producing goods for luxury consumption (Martinussen
1997). One can see capitalism in circulation of capital but modes of production remain Self-Instructional
Material 17

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES pre-capitalist. The Centre is therefore able to extract resources and cheap labour
from the Periphery to earn high profit. This relation of dependency is based on unequal
exchange and this asymmetric relationship leads to the continuation of dependency.
Dos Santos (1971) discussed three historical forms of dependency: (i) colonial
dependence, (ii) financial-industrial dependence, and (iii) technological-industrial
dependence (So 1990: 99). Santos identifies some limitations on the industrial
development of underdeveloped countries. The underdeveloped countries have to
rely on foreign capital leading to political dependence. They are in a monopolized
market where raw materials are cheap and industrial products are high. Therefore, the
amount of capital leaving the dependent country is much more than the amount entering.
Also, the monopoly of imperial centres over the technology makes the relation even
more asymmetrical. The context of cheap labour in combination with the presence of
capital-intensive technology leads to differences in the level of domestic wages. Thus,
there is a “high rate of exploitation or ‘superexploitation’ of labour power” (So 1990).
Thus the monopolistic control over foreign capital, foreign finance, and foreign
technology leads to the economic backwardness and internal social marginalization in
the underdeveloped countries.
Other scholars like Arghiri Emmanuel (1972) and Geoffrey Kay (1975) also
provided somewhat similar theoretical understanding by looking at the unequal exchange
and exploitation of the peripheral economies. F.H. Cardoso (1974) posited the idea
of ‘development in dependency’ and rejected the tendency of treating the peripheral
countries as single group of dependent economies. He focused more on the internal
conditions and argued that external factors would have different results based on
“dissimilar internal conditions” (Martinussen 1997). Due to such diagnosis, Cardoso
was also against recommending general set of strategies for all peripheral countries.
In general, the Third World perspective attempts at dismantling the Eurocentric
bias of the comparative politics. It highlights the limitations of the ‘grand narratives’
and focuses on two important aspects: the impact of colonialism and the cultural
specificity of the non-West. It is through such a challenge that the discipline has been
able to move beyond its Eurocentric bubble.

Self-Instructional
18 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

NOTES
1.7 SUMMARY

Comparative politics is a broad sub-discipline that involves various traditions, methods,

and approaches. It includes description, analysis, prediction, and generalization of
political activity. Comparative politics has been accused of being Eurocentric, parochial,
formalistic, and excessively descriptive. Despite these limitations and problems, scholars
have sought to find solution and enhance the ambit of comparative politics. It is important
to break the ethnocentric nature and situate the political processes in context. In this
regards, it is asserted that one needs to situate analysis in historical, cultural and
geographic contexts. It is important to note that over-generalization is a problematic
aspect of any theory. If one seeks to explain a political activity in complete abstraction,
it would be away from reality. If the study is only looking at specific situations, it loses
its relevance for broader context. Therefore, a shift towards middle-level of grounded
theory was advocated by scholars (Blondel 1981). The narrowing of the scope of
comparative political analysis also led to a focus on case-oriented studies. Against the
criticism that comparativists tend to universalize concepts, there was a renewed focus
on development of methods based on few cases. However, this approach was also
considered problematic as the hypothesis is not testable when there are several factors
at play. Despite these problems and narrowing of focus, comparative political analysis
remains a very important sub-discipline of political science. It provides insight into
contemporary national, regional and international politics by providing descriptive,
analytical and methodological frames of reference.

1.8 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1. What do you understand by Eurocentrism? Highlight its impact on the study of

Comparative Politics.
2. Evaluate that how the classification of political system provides an important
tool to understand comparative politics.

Self-Instructional
Material 19

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
1.9 REFERENCES

 Black, C.E. (1966), The Dynamics of Modernization: A Study in

Comparative History, New York: Harper and Row.
 Blondel, Jean (1981), The Discipline of Politics, Butterworths: London.
 Blondel, Jean (1999), “Then and Now: Comparative Politics”, Political Studies,
XLVII, pp. 152-160.
 Caramani, Daniele (2011), “Introduction to comparative politics”, in Daniele
Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics, 2nd edition, Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
 Chandhoke, Neera (1996), “Limits of Comparative Political Analysis”,
Economic and Political Weekly, 31 (4): 2-8.
 Dogan, Mattei and Dominique Pelassy (1990) How to Compare Nations:
Strategies in Comparative Politics, 2nd edition, Chatham, NJ: Chatham
House.
 Finn, V.K. (2011), “J.S. Mill’s inductive methods in artificial intelligence systems.
Part I”, Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 38: 385-402.
 Hague, Rod, Martin Harrop and John McComrick (2016), Comparative
Government and Politics: An Introduction, 10th edition, London: Palgrave.
 Kopstein, J. and M. Lichbach, (eds.) (2005) Comparative Politics: Interests,
Identities, and Institutions in a Changing Global Order, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp.1-5; 16-36; 253-290.
 Landman, Todd (2008), Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics: An
Introduction, New York: Routledge.
 Lijphart, Arend (1971), “Comparative Politics and Comparative Method”, The
American Political Science Review, 65 (3): 682-693.
 Macridis, Roy C. (1955), “Major Characteristics of the Traditional Approach”,
in The Study of Comparative Politics, New York: Random House, pp. 7-14.
 Martinussen, John (1997), Society, State and Market: A guide to competing
Self-Instructional theories of development, London: Zed Books Ltd.
20 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Understanding Comparative Politics: Nature and Scope, Why to ...

 Mohanty, Manoranjan (1975), “Comparative Political Theory and Third World NOTES
Sensitivity”, Teaching Politics, 1&2.
 Newton, Kenneth and Jan W. Van Deth (2010), Foundations of Comparative
Politics, Cambridge University Press, 2010.
 So, Alvin Y. (1990), Social Change and Development: Modernization,
Dependency and World System Theories, London: Sage Publications.

Self-Instructional
Material 21

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Unit II

Lesson 2 Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional

Approach, System Approach, Structural-Functional
Approach

Lesson 3 Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics:

Political Culture Approach

Lesson 4 New Institutionalism

Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

LESSON 2 NOTES

APPROACHES TO STUDYING COMPARATIVE

POLITICS: INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH, SYSTEM
APPROACH, STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONAL
APPROACH
Bhagyanagar Vineeth Srivatsava
Research Scholar, JNU
Structure

2.1 Learning Objectives

2.2 Introduction
2.3 Institutional Approach
2.3.1 Characteristics of Institutional Approach
2.3.2 Criticisms
2.3.3 Concluding Remarks
2.4 Systems Approach
2.4.1 Characteristics of the Systems
2.4.2 David Easton’s Systems Analysis
2.4.3 Criticism
2.4.4 Concluding Remarks
2.5 Structural Functionalism
2.5.1 Criticism
2.6 Summary
2.7 Self - Assessment Questions
2.8 References

2.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this lesson, the students will be able to understand:

 Various approaches - Institutional approach, Systems approach, Structural-
Self-Instructional
functional approach, and their relevance in comparative politics. Material 25

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES  Utility of system approach.

 Main impact of system theory in comparative politics.

2.2 INTRODUCTION

In the earlier unit, the scope and nature of comparative politics have been familiarized
to the readers. This lesson focuses on the various approaches that are dominant in
comparative political theory. In particular, we limit ourselves to three crucial approaches:
Institutional approach, Systems approach and Structural-Functional approach. This
lesson aims not only to engage in debates on approaches used in comparative politics
but also to understand and reflect the merits and demerits of each approach, its role in
the development of the discipline, and its relevance for the researcher in their study.
Before we move forward with the discussion, it is essential to step back and understand
what are approaches. In a narrow sense, if we say that comparative politics is essentially
comparing various forms of political life, approaches are various ways to compare.
For example, suppose we want to compare two objects–A and B. In that case, we
should have prior rules established on how they should be compared, what
characteristics of A and B are to be taken into consideration for comparison. In
comparing political systems, political culture and institutional approaches serve as ways
of comparison. Each approach is evolved out of complex intellectual history and shaped
by the events of that particular time. It is therefore essential to keep in mind that every
approach has its particular relevance in the discipline.
The approaches used in the theory of comparative politics can broadly be
categorized into two–the traditional approaches and modern approaches. Without
emphasizing too much on contrasting traditional and the modern approach, it suffices
to hold that the traditional approaches are concerned with a normative perspective of
politics supplemented by the study of formal structures, institutions, etc. Some of the
key proponents of this approach include Aristotle, James Bryce, Harold Laski, Walter
Bagehot, etc. The behavioural revolution in social sciences attacked the traditional
methods in political science and emphasized the need for scientific criteria in comparative
research. The modern approaches utilize these scientific methods to study various
Self-Instructional political systems by understanding measurable aspects of the system.
26 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

NOTES
2.3 INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH

Before we begin with the discussion on the institutional approach, it is important to

emphasize what institutions mean. A consistent and organized pattern of behaviour or
activities established by custom or law can broadly be called as an institution. Therefore,
an institution means not only bodies like Parliament and Judiciary but also customs and
or any other patterned behaviour of the society. You might be aware of the fact that
marriage is an institution in a sociological study. The disciplinary variations in the definition
of the term ‘institution’ should not be surprising. It can, therefore, be argued that
political science as a discipline is the study of institutions. This tradition is not new at all
and goes as back as to Aristotle. The primary concern of the approach can broadly be
understood as to how the institutions nurture the society, subjects, or citizens for a
better life. Aristotle compared as many as 158 constitutions to understand the normative
question- which institutions work better. Machiavelli, for example, postulated advice
to the institution of the Prince so that there shall be a proper control of the subjects.
Even when Hobbes was writing Leviathan (2009), he was concerned by the English
civil war and therefore propagated for strong institutions. This list of thinkers who
were concerned with institutions is non-exhaustive and need not be elaborated here,
but it is essential to keep in mind that many thinkers since the beginning were concerned
with the institutions in one way or the other. However, the institutional approach as a
method became the mainstream much later with its leading proponents Carl Friedrich,
James Bryce, A. L. Lowell, Herman Finer and Samuel Finer.
Jean Blondel argued in this regard that James Bryce and Lowell are true founders
of comparative politics as a distinct branch of study within the political discipline due
to their prominent contribution to the field in the latter half of the nineteenth century.
Bryce is known for his contributions in his the American Commonwealth (1888) and
Modern Democracies (1921). In his work Modern Democracies, he tried to
understand the workings of legislature and its decline. Lowell studied France,
Switzerland, Germany, etc., separately and sought to conduct a comparative study of
the referendum and its impact. His well-known works include Government and Parties
in Continental Europe (1896) and Public Opinion and Popular Government
(1913). Although scholars before them undertook the study of institutions, Bryce and
Self-Instructional
Lowell argued that such studies were incomplete and did not offer a nuanced argument. Material 27

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES They stressed that it is not only essential to study the theoretical bases of the government,
but it is equally important to highlight the ‘practices of the government’, which was
missing in the earlier accounts of the institutional approach. They argued that a
researcher must focus both on facts and theoretical arguments for a better understanding
of the political system and better comparison. They suggested using both qualitative
and quantitative methods in the collection of data.
The institutional approach was one of the main pillars of political science discipline
till the first half of the twentieth century. Many scholars tried to understand various
institutions. For example, Woodrow Wilson, former President of the United States of
America, compared governments of the USA and Europe and pointed to what the
American government could learn from European governments (Doig, 1983). The
institutional approach has certain specific characteristics that help us to understand the
approach in details. Guy Peters (1999) lists the characteristics of the institutional
approach as given below:

2.3.1 Characteristics of Institutional Approach

 Legalism: The institutional approach gave law a central place in comparison of

various institutions. Even in the example of Wilson mentioned above, we can
notice the prominence of law through his emphasis on types of government. The
prominence of law can broadly be attributed to the fact that the law constitutes
the basis of political life and affect the behaviour of citizens in a significant way.
Despite its centrality in the approach, scholars differ in their explanation of the
relationship between law and society. Guy Peters (1999) holds that the study of
law as the basis of political knowledge achieved its height in the Prussian State
and thereafter in Germany.
 Structuralism: For the scholars of the institutional approach, the structure
determines the behaviour. Therefore, major institutional features, the ideal types
of government- parliamentary or Presidential, various models of parliamentary
government, and presidential governments were extensively researched. The
structures studied in this approach tended to be formal and constitutional. The
assumption made by the researcher by the study of structures is that one could
predict the behaviour of the system by identifying the salient aspects of the
Self-Instructional structure.
28 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

 Holism: The researcher using the institutional approach tended to compare NOTES
whole systems. Although it is tougher to make generalisations as the researcher
has to study large systems, it equipped them with the complex nature of political
life and the interplay of various aspects in affecting political behaviour.
 Historicism: The contemporary political institutions are undoubtedly embedded
in their historical conditions. The institutional approach consisted of a historical
analysis of the institutions that the researcher is set to understand and analyse.
The understanding of historical conditions helps the researcher to understand
the pattern of development for appropriate prediction. The historical conditions
also consider the role of the complex relationship between society and politics
that offers a rich perspective of the political system.
 Normativity: The institutional approach was normative in nature. It was
concerned with the questions like what life ought to be and the role of good
government in achieving it. The normative analysis of the institutionalists came
under attack by the behaviourist scholars, which will be dealt in the later sections.

2.3.2 Criticisms

The institutional approach, although was dominant in the discipline, has drawbacks
that were pointed out mainly by behavioural scholars. The scientific revolution in the
Political Science discipline meant that the speculative nature of approaches was
dismissed for fact-based theories. We shall try to point few drawbacks that the
institutional approach faces. As mentioned earlier, the institutional approach gave the
structure a prominent role in the explanation of the political system. However, this
structural nature of the approach did not consider the role of the individuals or groups
in nurturing the system except for few ‘great men’. It is very evident from today’s
globalised world that non-structural aspects of the state like corporates and other
non-state actors hold a strong influence on the system as well. Further, Roy Macridis
(1955) argued that the tendency of institutionalism to study formal institutions led the
approach to be very euro-centric and parochial in nature. Almond and Coleman (1960)
also pointed out that the institutional approach faced a crisis as it could not comprehend
the political systems of the third world countries where the institutions were less or not
developed like that of European counterparts.
Self-Instructional
Material 29

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES The historicism and normative analysis of the institutional approach came under
attack with the behavioural revolution in the discipline. Behavioural scholars emphasized
more on the facts to understand the political system and predict future behaviour,
rallied for separation of fact from the norm, and engaged in understanding what is
instead of the normative question of what ought to be. Further, holistic research of
the approach, which has many advantages, makes it difficult not only to generalize but
also compare. Macridis (1960) was right in this regard when he pointed out that
comparative politics is more descriptive than comparative. To elaborate a little more
on this, if we suppose research on the political system of India and England, we try to
understand the political system through a holistic approach and study the formal
institutions. This method describes the respective political systems rather than comparing
them.

2.3.3 Concluding Remarks

Despite its shortcomings, it can be argued that the institutional approach forms one of
the pillars of political science research. The vast amount of research done even today
on formal institutions and their relationship with society is a testament to the prominence
of this approach. The behavioural revolution sure did point out the lacunae that approach
has, but some of the shortcomings are addressed by the rise of the new institutional
approach, you will learn more about in the next lesson.

2.4 SYSTEMS APPROACH

The systems approach in political science has its origins in the critique of traditional
approaches of comparative politics. Proponents of modern approaches, including the
systems approach, rejected strict compartmentalization of discipline, which was the
result of traditional approaches. They championed the cause of the unification of various
disciplinary methods. In particular, they argued the need to draw from natural sciences
to understand social phenomena objectively and make predictions more consistent
through such objective analysis. The origins of the systems approach, in general, can
be traced to German Biologist Ludwig Von Bertalanffy who pioneered the movement
Self-Instructional
30 Material
of unification of all the natural sciences. It came to political science through its application

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

in disciplines like anthropology and sociology through the works of Emile Durkheim, NOTES
Robert K. Merton, and Talcott Parsons, respectively. Although the definition of the
word ‘system’ varies in different disciplines, Bertalanffy (1956) described it as “a set
of elements standing in interaction”. Mortan Kaplan (1967), on the other hand, defines
the object of system analysis as “a study of a set of interrelated variables, as distinguished
from the environment of the set, and of the ways in which this set is maintained under
the impact of environmental disturbances.”

2.4.1 Characteristics of the Systems

David Apter (1978) characterized systems in the following ways:

1. Systems are composed of functional inter-relationships among the elements
based on some sort of communication within its specified boundaries or
environment. The elements in such a system are not random aggregation, but
their inter-dependence allows the existence of the system.
2. There are sub-systems within a system.
3. Systems take inputs in the form of demands and supports. The system translates
those inputs into outputs in the form of laws and policies.
As explained above, the systems approach draws heavily from the other
disciplines and rejects the strict compartmentalization of the disciplines. The concept
of the system allowed the approach to replace the excessive focus on the State, formal
institutions and historicism and allow us to understand extra-legal matters, including
social and cultural institutions. It thus forms a multi-disciplinary or inter-disciplinary
approach to understand political systems. This approach is extremely helpful in sorting
out large data and understanding patterns of the systems. It also enables the researcher
to understand the direction of development of the political system without emphasizing
too much on history or normative questions by objectively studying the variables.
However, the use of systems theory in social sciences has to be done with utmost
diligence keeping social realities in mind. Unlike natural objects, which are stable in
nature, social objects are much volatile, and this needs to be taken into consideration
while applying systems theory in understanding social phenomena. Kaplan rightly
pointed out in this regard that the social researcher should act as a ‘balancer’ between
natural science methods and the complexities of social reality. Self-Instructional
Material 31

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES Environment

Demands Political System Laws

Supports Policies

Feedback

Fig. 2.1 A simple diagrammatic description of the Political System

2.4.2 David Easton’s Systems Analysis

David Easton pioneered the movement of systems analysis in the political science
discipline. His celebrated work, A Systems Analysis of Political Life (1965), provided
“an original set of concepts for arranging at the level of theory and interpreting political
phenomena in a new and helpful way” (Davis and Lewis 1971). Easton stood for a
political theory that is capable of explaining both national and international political
systems that helps us more in comparison. He rejected scholars of the traditional
approach who were obsessed with normative analysis and championed the cause of
the need for scientific methods in understanding the political system. Easton has
extensively written on systems analysis in his various works, and let us try to summarize
his theory briefly.
David Easton coined new definitions for the terms ‘politics’ and ‘political system’
instead of using existing definitions that were prevalent in political theory. For Easton,
politics is “the authoritative allocation of values”. A political system, therefore, is a “set
of interactions abstracted from the totality of social behaviour, through which values
are allocated for society” (Easton 1956). It should be kept in mind that the term values
for Easton are not similar to value-laden politics. Johari (2011) argues that the term
value was probably used in the economic sense meaning price or worth. Easton believes
that those in power determine the values, and politics becomes the allocation of values.

Self-Instructional
32 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

Natural and social systems have certain common properties, like a coping NOTES
mechanism that enables them to cope with disturbances that may be caused. Easton
argued that the political system has a ‘responding’ and ‘self-regulating’ mechanism to
correct, change and re-adjust its process. The political system is therefore not simply
static but a dynamic affair, although each system tries to maintain its identity intact. This
happens through a ‘feedback’ mechanism that transmits information from the
environment to the political system. However, Easton argues that a political system still
may face challenges from the environment, which he calls as stresses. There are two
kinds of stresses- demand stress and support stress. Demand stress may arise either if
the systems fail to take feedback into consideration or fails to meet certain demands.
This is termed as “demand-input overload”. Support stress arises when the members
of the political system do not support the system resulting in failure of the system.
Therefore, there needs to be a proper balance between inputs and outputs. Further,
the political system also requires certain structural bases like that of elections, political
parties and political beliefs and attitudes of people for the survival of the system. In
short, the political system for David Easton, as Davies and Lewis (1971) rightly pointed
out, is an “input-output mechanism dealing with political decisions and the activities
associated with these conditions”.

2.4.3 Criticism

We have seen from the above discussion that the systems analysis in political science
has come from natural sciences. But general systems theory and the systems theory in
political science are not completely similar. We have also seen characteristics of the
system and David Easton’s, one of the prominent proponents of systems theory,
contribution to the field. However, David Easton’s systems theory has been criticized
by many scholars for the limitations of the approach in understanding political systems.
We will briefly mention some of the criticisms.
David Easton’s definition of the terms ‘politics’ and ‘political system’ is very
broad and abstract in nature that it either “forces all phenomena into the framework of
a system” (Young 1968) or it is too abstract to formulate any hypothesis and
propositions. Secondly, there is not much description of the political system, making it
very ambiguous in nature. The distinction between open and closed systems are too
Self-Instructional
Material 33

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES blurry as well. Thirdly, systems theory takes only the present into account and ignores
the historical and social conditions that are necessary to predict the future of the political
system. Fourthly, systems theory still does not overcome the problem of the parochial
nature of traditional approaches and views world and politics from only the western
lenses. Lastly, Easton criticized the traditional approaches for too much emphasis on
formal institutions, and he tried to understand the behaviour of the political system
through the individual as an actor. But it is evident from his analysis that Easton was
interested in the individual only when they are part of the process of preserving the
system. Although the word nation or the state from traditional approaches have been
avoided and replaced with the term system, the emphasis is only on the system. In this
regard, Varma (1975) rightly pointed out that Easton, in his serious efforts to move
away from the traditional approaches to the behavioural approach, finds himself
somewhere in the middle. Paul F. Kress (1969) argues that the theory, like Easton’s
systems analysis, so respectful of facts, lacks any substance and presents to us as an
‘empty vision of politics’.

2.4.4 Concluding Remarks

Despite the above critical remarks by various scholars, it cannot be denied that systems
theory in political science has had a considerable impact on the discipline. It provided
a macro analysis of the political system that could be studied objectively. It also
broadened the scope of the discipline by studying the political systems of the non-
western world. Though Easton was hanging in the middle between traditional
approaches and behavioural approaches, his emphasis on facts led to the scientific
revolution in the discipline as we witness it today.

2.5 STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONALISM

After outlining the institutional and systems approach, structural functionalism is the
third approach in comparative politics that we discuss in this lesson. In a nutshell,
structural-functionalism means explaining the functions of political structures as a tool
of investigation. For example, if a researcher wants to compare the institution of the
Self-Instructional
34 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

Prime Minister of India and the United Kingdom, one could do so by understanding NOTES
the functions performed by the respective Prime Ministers of India and the United
Kingdom and find out the similarities and differences. But before we go on to a detailed
discussion of the approach, we need a basic understanding of what a structure and
function are. It need not be emphasized here again that the definitions for structure and
function vary not only based on the discipline but also among the scholars within the
discipline. Arrangements within a political system that perform a function or certain
functions are broadly called as structures. These functions can be either simple or
complex. Further, it can be a case that a single structure can perform a function, or a
group of structures together perform a complex function. It should be clear from the
above discussion what a function is, but it is essential to define it in precise terms.
Robert K. Merton (1959) defines functions as “those observed consequences which
make for the adaptation or readjustment of a given system; and dysfunctions those
observed consequences which lessen the adaptation or adjustment of the system”. If
system analysis considers the political system as a cybernetic machine with inputs and
outputs, functionalism gives space to the ‘organismic’ analogy.
The structural-functional approach in social science marked its moment in social
science by the mid-1960s. It became one of the dominant modes of explanation in
political science. Radcliffe Brown and Malinowski are two prominent scholars known
for the introduction of structural functionalism in social anthropology. Structural-functional
approaches of Marion Levy Jr., Robert K. Merton and Talcott Parsons in Political
Sociology has a deep impact on the political science discipline, after which there has
been systematic development of the structural-functional approach. It is not our purpose
here to engage with Brown, Malinowski, Levy, Merton, and Parsons in detail. Instead,
we focus specifically on structural functionalism in the political science discipline.
We shall very briefly mention some of the scholars in the discipline to whom
structural-functionalism owes its conceptual framework. Since the focus of the lesson
is only to introduce the students to the structural-functional approach, we avoid an in-
depth discussion of each of the scholars mentioned below. David Easton can be
regarded as one of the prominent scholars in functionalist thought in political science.
He was concerned with the stability of a given political system. Much of his analysis
was described in the earlier sections. Another prominent scholar in this approach is
William C. Mitchell. Mitchell, unlike Easton, does not make the mistake of confusing
Self-Instructional
Material 35

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES the political system with the social system and regards it as a sub-system of the social
system which performs the function of mobilizing resources for meeting the goals of
the social system. David Apter focused on the political systems of African countries
such as Uganda and Ghana and argued that the ‘imported systems’ in Third World
countries imposed by the colonial masters do not function properly as western scholars
predicted. He sought to understand the political systems in Third World by understanding
the functions of the government. Thus, structural functionalism gave a conceptual
framework to understand political systems belonging to the Third World.
Gabriel A. Almond is another political scientist who sought to understand the
change in political systems from traditional polities to modern. In the classification of
the political system, the efficiency of the political system was the key factor in Almond’s
classificatory model. He categorized that traditional polities are less effective and moved
towards a modern political system which is most effective. He believed that a researcher
who seeks to understand the political change in developing societies has to understand
the political systems of western societies for a proper analysis. For Almond, western
modern political systems form an ideal political system. He argued that a political
system has four characteristics- every political system has structures with varied
specialisation; despite structural differentiation, every political system performs some
similar political functions; many structures perform multiple functions, and; political
systems have a culture of their own. You will learn more about political culture in the
next lesson. Almond shifted the focus of comparison from observable institutional
mechanisms to functions of the system.

2.5.1 Criticism

Structural functionalism became one of the dominant explanations in political science

after the behavioural revolution within the discipline. However, it has some severe
limitations. We will try to look at few shortcomings of the approach. As it can be
noticed from the above discussion on the structural-functional approach, like the
systems approach, it focuses much on the static relationships. It fails to take into
account the dynamic relationships and historical account of the political system. In
their search for quantifiable methods to compare, political science was reduced to
static relationships instead of answering rich normative questions. Secondly, the theories
Self-Instructional
36 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

of Easton, Mitchell, Apter, Almond, and other functionalist theorists were broadly NOTES
concerned with questions of survival of the system and sought to answer the method
of stable adaptation in the event of any change. In other words, structural-functionalism
tended to be status quoist and against any sudden change. This excessive concern to
maintain the status quo raised eyebrows among scholars of Marxist and critical tradition.
For example, Gouldner (1971) criticized functionalists as “sociological conservation
corps of industrial society”, and Bhambhri (1973) accused functionalists of being
“defenders of bourgeoise at home and of imperialism abroad”. Marxists emphasized
the need for a revolutionary change in the system where the masses are exploited by
the bourgeoisie with the help of political leaders. The functional approach, therefore, is
seen as a threat that hampers the revolutionary consciousness of the masses.
In the previous section, we saw how functionalism gave impetus to a conceptual
framework to study the political systems of countries belonging to the Third World.
However, this is not prone to criticism. Many pointed out the irony that scholars of the
functional approach developed frameworks to understand the developing societies in
their comfortable libraries and office rooms in Harvard and Chicago Universities that
lacked political reality. The extravagant concern for the quantitative methods led to
validating exploitative western society and accusing Third World societies of not being
modern enough. The parochial nature of theory could be seen in Almond’s theory, as
well as he believed that the ideal society was modern western society and change can
only be traditional to modern.
Despite the above-mentioned criticisms, it is no doubt that the structural-
functional approach has certain advantages in studying western democracies, but
application in the case of Third World countries has to be done with a certain caution.
A researcher has to give priority to political and societal realities instead of depending
on an approach that might not completely understand the political system.

2.6 SUMMARY

This lesson introduced the reader to dominant approaches used in comparative politics.
The characteristics, merits and criticisms of the institutional approach were discussed
Self-Instructional
Material 37

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES in the first section of this lesson. The development of approaches like systems analysis
and structural functionalism was introduced in the context of the behavioural revolution
in social sciences and the determination of scholars to do away with strict disciplinary
boundaries that inhibited knowledge about social and natural phenomena. We argued
that each of the approaches discussed in this particular lesson has their own merits and
shortcomings. A researcher who seeks to do comparative research should carefully
plan which approach can possibly suit the field of their research instead of fixating on
a particular approach.

2.7 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1. Write an essay on various approaches in Comparative politics.

2. Explain how system approach work in apolitical environment. Discuss David
Easton’s theory on system.
3. Write an elaborate explanation on Structural - Functional theory on system
approach.

2.8 REFERENCES

 Almond, G and Coleman, J. S. (1960), The Politics of Developing Areas,

Princeton: Princeton University Press.
 Apter, David (1978), Introduction to Political Analysis, New Delhi: Prentice
Hall.
 Bertalanffy, Von Ludwig (1956), General systems theory, General systems,
vol. 1, pp. 1-10.
 Bhambhri, C. P. (1973), “Functionalism in Politics”, Indian Journal of Political
Science, vol. XXXIV, No. 4, October-December.

Self-Instructional
38 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Institutional Approach, ...

 Bryce, James (1888), The American Commonwealth, London: MacMillan NOTES

and Co.
 Bryce, James (1888), Modern Democracies, New York: MacMillan.
 Davies, Morton R. and Lewis, Vaughan A. (1971), Models of Political System,
New Delhi: Vikas Publications.
 Doig, J. (1983), ‘if I see a Murderous Fellow Sharpening a Knife Cleverly…’:
The Wilsonian Dichotomy and Public Authority, Public Administration Review,
vol. 43, pp. 292-304.
 Easton, David (1956), A Framework for Political Analysis, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
 Easton, David (1965), A Systems Analysis of Political Life, Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
 Gouldner, A. G. (1971), The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology, New Delhi:
Hiene-mann.
 Hobbes, Thomas (2009), Leviathan, Oxford: Oxford University Publications.
 Johari, J. C. (2011), Comparative Politics, New Delhi: Sterling Publishers.
 Kaplan, Morton A. (1967), “Systems Theory”, in James C. Charlesworth (eds.),
Contemporary Political Analysis, New York: Free Press.
 Kress, Paul F. (1969), “A Critique of Easton’s Systems Analysis”, in James A
Gould and Vincent V Thursby (eds.), Contemporary Political Thought: Issues
in Scope, Value, and Direction, New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston.
 Lowell, A. Lawrence (1896), Government and Parties in Continental
Europe, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
 Lowell, A. Lawrence (1913), Public Opinion and Popular Government,
New York: Longmans, Green, and Co.
 Macridis, Roy (1955), The Study of Comparative Government, New York:
Random House.
 Merton, Robert K. (1959), Social Theory and Social Structure, Illinois: Free
Press of Glancoe.
Self-Instructional
Material 39

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES  Peters, B. Guy (1999), Institutional Theory in Political Science: The ‘New
Institutionalism’, London: Pinter.
 Varma, S. P. (1975), Modern Political Theory, New Delhi: Vikas Publications.
 Young, O. R. (1968), Systems of Political Science, New Jersey: Prentice
Hall.

Self-Instructional
40 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

LESSON 3 NOTES

APPROACHES TO STUDYING COMPARATIVE

POLITICS: POLITICAL CULTURE APPROACH
Dr. Kamal Kumar
Assistant Professor, Shivaji College, DU
Structure
3.1 Learning Objectives
3.2 Introduction
3.3 Political Culture Approach
3.4 Almond and Verba’s Conception of Political Culture
3.5 Civic Culture
3.6 Other Major Conceptions on Political Culture
3.7 Limitation of Political Culture Approach
3.8 Summary
3.9 Self - Assessment Questions
3.10 References

3.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this lesson, the students will be able to understand:

 The importance of culture in politics and Almond and Verba’s conception of
civic culture.
 Enabling the political scientists and researchers to empirically analyze the
interactions between the individual behaviours and political system.

Self-Instructional
Material 41

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
3.2 INTRODUCTION

This lesson attempts to analyze the political culture approach in the field of comparative
politics. Approaches and methods are significant, especially in the context of social
sciences including political science, not just in developing an understanding about the
socio-political phenomena, but also in enabling the researchers and political scientists
to offer a solution to certain complex problems in any given time and context. In
particular, approaches hold a very important place in the field of comparative politics
as they help us to systematically explain the different political processes, political events,
and institutional activities as well as social behaviours in a comparative manner. At the
same time, they encourage the scholars (of comparative politics) to predict the social
and political outcomes. In the preceding lessons, the analysis on different key traditional
and modern approaches has been offered. This lesson seeks to evaluate one of the
significant modern approaches, that is, political culture to the study of comparative
politics. It begins with the discussion on the meaning of the term ‘political culture’ and
overview of key conceptions offered by its principal proponents, especially the
conception of Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba. It will be followed by its key limitations
and criticisms.

3.3 POLITICAL CULTURE APPROACH

Society is an integral part of a political system including democratic system, and the
study of continuous interactions between the society and political system is the key
concern of the political culture approach. Scholarly interest in this modern approach is
associated with the emergence of behavioural science. As Andrew Bove (2002: 3)
noted that “political culture was brought in as ally of, and soon became a crucial term
within, a behaviouralist science whose basic mode is strict causal explanation, not
interpretative description”. Instead of emphasizing upon the study of formal political
institutions and processes, the behaviourist political science—unlike the traditional
approaches such as traditional institutional approach, historical approach, and
Self-Instructional
philosophical approach among others—places the study of human behaviour and
42 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

interaction with natural world (political institutions and society in the context of social NOTES
sciences) at the centre of its analysis. With the increasing popularity of behaviouralist
methods and tools in social sciences, scholars began to attach more significance to the
sociological (cultural) aspects—in comparison to the structural and historical aspects—
in the studies of political science. Furthermore, it is observed that the “political culture
literature helped to provide political science itself with a sense of legitimacy and authority
after World War II” (Formisano, 2001: 397). In that sense, the political culture marked
the emergence of a new epoch in political science where sociological and behavioural
aspects gained the significance in the scholarly investigations.
The political culture approach attracted the attention of political scientists and
researches in the mid of twentieth century. Scholars though attribute its genesis to the
writings of Johann G. Herder, Alexis de Tocqueville and Montesquieu among others,
but it was Gabriel Almond whose ground-breaking work, entitled “Comparative
Political Systems” (1956) credited to popularise the concept in the field of political
science during the modern times. For Almond, “every political system is embedded in
a particular pattern of orientations to political action”, and he defined this pattern as
“political culture” (cited in Formisano, 2001: 396). In that sense, the latter concept is
imperative to understand the people’s orientations (in terms of the political actions) in
any given political system.
The term political culture, in general, refers to the people’s behaviours, beliefs,
attitudes, opinions, and orientations towards the political system and its varied institutions
as well political processes and activities. In fact, in order to understand the “political
tendencies in a nation, one place to begin is with public attitudes toward politics and
the citizen’s role in the political system—what we call a nation’s political culture” (Powell,
et al. 2015: 63). In this regard, Alan A. Ball argues that the concept of “political culture
is composed of the attitudes, beliefs, emotions and values of society that relates to the
political system and to apolitical issues” (Ball, 1971: 56). In a similar vein, Almond and
Verba (1963: 14) state that this term denotes the “political orientations—attitudes
towards the political system and its various parts, and attitudes toward the role of the
self in the system.” Furthermore, Roy C. Macridis interestingly offers a slightly different
understanding of the concept of political culture, he asserts that it “constitutes commonly
shared goals and commonly accepted rules of individual and groups interaction in
terms of which authoritative decision and choice will be made by all the ‘actors’ within
Self-Instructional
a political system” (cited in Kim, 1964: 331). In other words, the study of human Material 43

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES interaction with the government and its different formal political institutions is the central
objective of the political culture approach.
It is important to note here that the different communities, groups, and members
of the society may have their own individual political culture indicating their peculiar
political understanding and orientations. However, it does not refer to the people’s
opinions and viewpoints towards individual political actors like head of the government
(president in the context of US and the Prime Minster of India) and political party
leader. While evaluating the key components of the political culture, Samuel H. Beer
argues that “values, beliefs and emotional attitudes” are the principal components (Kim,
1964: 324). In other words, people’s values, beliefs and attitudes, for Beer, toward
the political system and governance is what that implies their political culture. Moreover,
the nature of political culture varies according to the degree of civic engagement in the
political system. Owing to different socio-political and economic contexts, citizens in
some political system or some part of the country are likely to be more active in the
politics than the other. For example; the voter turnout in 2019 Kerala assembly elections
(77.68%) is considerably higher than 2020 Delhi assembly elections (62.82%)
according to the Election Commission of India. Hence, the political culture of distinct
groups and communities in a society can be varied according to the context and socio-
political milieu.

3.4 ALMOND AND VERBA’S CONCEPTION OF

POLITICAL CULTURE

Many scholars like Lucian Pye, Edward W. Lehman, Edmund Burke, Samuel H.
Beer, Roy C. Macridis and Ronald Inglehart among others defined the theoretical
underpinnings of political culture from different standpoints. The ground-breaking work
on political culture that inspired generation of researchers and scholars, has been
presented by Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba in their landmark study entitled
“The Civil Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations” (1963).
They comprehensively defined and explained the key elements of the political culture
approach by following the comparative methods and empirical tools. Almond and
Self-Instructional Verba’s analysis is based on the cross-national survey and interviews carried out,
44 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

during 1959-1960, on a large scale in five democratic countries such as the United NOTES
States, Italy, Britain, Mexico, and West Germany. The primary objective of their classic
study was to identify the political culture that may help to sustain and strengthen the
liberal democracy. While explaining the rationale of their study in the introductory
chapter, Almond and Verba posed a question that “How can these subtleties and these
humane etiquettes [of liberal democracies] survive even among ourselves in a world
caught in the grip of a science and technology run wild, destructive of tradition and of
community and possibly of life itself?” (Almond and Verba, 1963: 7). In other words,
they had perceived a potential threat to the stability of democratic regimes in the cold
war period, and probably that was why, they were engaged in exploring the ways to
consolidate the institutions of liberal democracy.
While outlining the different types of political culture, Almond and Verba
emphasized upon the three types of political orientations (that primly exists among the
individuals and social groups) such as cognitive orientation, affective orientation,
and evaluational orientation. The first orientation denotes the “knowledge of and
belief about the political system, its roles and the incumbents of these roles, its inputs
and its outputs” (Almond and Verba, 1963: 7). The affective orientation explains the
“feeling about the political system, its roles, personnel, and performance” (Ibid.). The
third major orientation, evaluational orientation, refers to the “judgements and opinions
about political objects that typically involve the combination of value standards and
criteria with information and feelings” (Ibid.). This three-fold classification of political
orientation indicates the relationships between the members of the society and the
political system, and the degree of this relationship defines the role of the people in
politics that in turn, shapes their political culture, as discussed in the following paragraphs.
Based on their rigorous cross-national field-work and comparative research,
Almond and Verba classified the political cultures into following three main categories:
(i) Parochial Political Culture: This political culture refers to such societies
where citizens are neither aware of their political system nor interested in
the political activities and events. People in parochial political culture do
not possess any expertise in the political activities and processes that
explicitly reflect in their political attitudes and orientations. At the same
time, people’s expectations from the politics are virtually none and,
therefore, they are not active in politics. For instance; the “political cultures Self-Instructional
Material 45

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES of African tribal societies and autonomous local communities” are perfect
example of this type of political culture (Almond and Verba, 1963: 14). It
is also worth noting that “parochial cultures have been rare in established
democracies but elements can be found in isolated rural communities”
where the lives of common people appear unaffected by the national politics
(Rod and Martin, 2004: 89). In other words, citizens’ understanding of
the political system, political processes and political leaderships is very
low or probably zero because of their complete ignorance about the political
system and its different affairs. Also, they are not eager to be part of the
political processes in order to influence the political outcomes rather
occupied with their routine lives.
(ii) Subject Political Culture: In this second type of political culture, citizens
have a good sense of the politics and government that governs them. People,
however, are not much interested in participating in the political activities
since they consider themselves as the “subject” of the political system
rather than its active participant or agent. In this regard, Almond and Verba
state that the citizens here consider the governmental policies and law as
“something [they] obeys, not something [they] helps” shaping them (Almond
and Verba, 1963: 118). Subject political culture appears in tune with the
character of highly centralized and hierarchical political regimes like
authoritarian regimes where the people do have a good knowledge about
the political system and activities, but they are not often encouraged or
legitimately allowed to participate in the politics (Rod and Martin, 2004:
89). In other words, people unlike parochial political culture, are well
aware of the political system and government’s working as well as their
political rights, but they lack or have minimal opportunities to influence the
political outcome and decision-making process, and probably that is why,
they are politically passive.
(iii) Participant Political Culture: The participant culture is one where the
members of the society, like subject culture, are highly informed of their
country’s politics and the political system. But unlike the subject culture,

Self-Instructional
46 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

they are active participants of politics as they consider themselves as one NOTES
of its significant stakeholders who cannot just influence the political
outcomes but can also shape the governmental policies and decisions. In
this regard, Almond and Verba (1963: 18) argue that the citizens “tend to
be oriented toward an ‘active’ role of the self in the polity…” Moreover,
citizens as the keen observers of politics have a very strong political opinion
and view about the politics and as a result, they do not hesitate to raise
their voice against the government when they find any governmental decision
and policy not in tune with the peoples’ demands. Participant cultures are
seemingly most compatible to the democratic regimes because of its vibrant
nature.
While classifying the political cultures in above three categories, Almond and
Verba (1963: 19) state that their classification “does not imply homogeneity or uniformity
of political cultures. Thus political system with predominately participant cultures will,
even in the limiting case, include both subjects and parochial.” In that sense, all three
political cultures can be found coexisting in any given political system including
democracy.

3.5 CIVIC CULTURE

In comparison to parochial and subject cultures, the participant culture undoubtedly

appears as the best suitable political culture for the stable liberal democracy where
citizens are encouraged to play an active and constructive role at the different levels of
the government. However, Almond and Verba rejected any such propositions because,
according to them, the democracy would “prove most stable in societies blending
different cultures in a particular mix”, and they termed this mixture as the “civic culture”
as illustrated in the figure 3.1 (Rod and Martin, 2004, 89). In other words, the mixed
culture consisting of the elements of all three major cultures—parochial, subject and
participant cultures—appears ideal for the stability of a democratic political system.

Self-Instructional
Material 47

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES

Fig. 3.1 Almond and Verba’s Analysis of the Civic Culture

In the civil culture, majority of the citizens are informed about the political system
and their political responsibilities, but it is “the passive minority, whether parochials,
subjects or both, [who] provide stability to the system” (Rod and Martin, 2004, 90).
Furthermore, the citizens (the participants) are not engaged in the politics to the extent
that they refrain to follow those governmental decisions and orders with which they do
not agree and become the source of chaos in a society. In other words, citizens in the
civil culture are capable of participating in the political activities and influencing political
outcomes and decisions (like they are in the participant political culture), but they often
do not do so (like parochial and subject political cultures). Therefore, the civil culture
plays a significant role in maintaining a balance “between popular control and effective
governance” in a democratic system (Ibid). In other words, on one hand, the citizens
have access to many platforms to influence the government’s decisions and on the
other hand, the policy-making process, and the political elites have flexibilities to
sometime take tough decisions on sensitive issues against the popular opinions. In their
cross-national study of five democratic countries, Almond and Verba concluded that
the political culture in Britain and the United States—unlike in Mexico, Italy, and West
Germany—was in sync with norms of the civil culture, and thus, found best suitable for
stable democracy. Because in both the United States and Britain, the members of the
nation “felt they could influence the government but often chose not to do so, thus
Self-Instructional giving the government its required agility” (Ibid).
48 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

NOTES
3.6 OTHER MAJOR CONCEPTIONS ON POLITICAL
CULTURE

Ronald Inglehart is one of the principal proponents of the political culture approach. In
his popular work entitled “The Renaissance of Political Culture” (1988), he states
that citizens in different societies “are characterized by durable cultural orientations
that have major political and economic consequences” (Inglehart, 1988: 1203). In
that sense, Inglehart—in contrast to Almond and Verba—links the cultural factors
(civic culture) with political stability as well as economic development. He offers a
somewhat fresh and interesting explanation of the term ‘civic culture’ and defines it as
“a coherent syndrome of personal life satisfaction, political satisfaction, interpersonal
trust, and support for the existing social order” (Ibid). For Inglehart, the societies with
a high degree of this syndrome have more probabilities than those with a low degree to
be stable democracies. In other words, his cross-national analysis suggests that there
is a positive co-relation between personal and political satisfaction as well as
interpersonal trust and the stable democracy since these all factors constitute “a
syndrome of positive attitudes toward” the democratic institutions (Ibid., 1215). Hence,
societies with a high degree of such syndrome are to be expected to promote democratic
ethos as well as strengthen democratic institutions than those characterized by a low
degree of such attitudes.
By the late 1980s, political culture approach had gained the prominence amongst
the historians. Most notably, two historians such as John L Brooke in his award-
winning work entitled “Society and Political Culture on Worcester County
Massachusetts, 1773-1861” (1989) and Daniel Walker Howe in “The Evangelical
Movement and Political Culture in the North during the Second Party System”
(1991) followed this approach in their historical inquiries. In fact, Howe extended the
conceptual arena of political culture by including the social movements and their struggle
for political power. He emphasized that one had “to define political culture to include
all struggles over power, not just those decided by elections” (Formisano, 2001: 416).
For Howe, the people’s campaigns for gender justice, environmental protection, racial
justice, and the rights of working class among others were significant in the US politics,
and their appropriate analysis was essential to develop a comprehensive understanding
Self-Instructional
about the locals’ political culture. In his way, Howe credited to broaden the definition Material 49

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES of ‘political culture’ as well as ‘politics’ by bringing the social movements under its
theoretical ambit.
Social Capital and Political Culture
In the latter decade of twentieth century, the political culture approach attracted more
popularity with the works of scholars like Robert Putnam. In his most prominent work
entitled “Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy” (1993),
Putnam studied the working of Italian regional governments by employing varied
approaches and empirical tools. David D. Laitin (1995) credited the latter work to
mark a “stunning new beginning for political culture research” (Formisano, 2001: 406).
However, Putnam employed the term ‘social capital’ to analyze the roots of people’s
engagement in politics. The term refers to “networks together with shared norms,
values and understandings that facilitate co-operation within or among groups” (Keeley,
2007: 103). According to Putnam, social capital “may possibly be more important
than physical or human capital” for stable democracies and administrative efficiencies
(Rotberg, 1999: 339). Since he hypothesized that societies with a high degree of
social capital encouraged people to participate in political activities and processes that
was considered significant for political stability and effective governance. While analyzing
the interrelation between civic culture (Almond and Verba) and social capital (Putnam),
Robert I. Rotberg (1999: 341) argues that a “civic culture exists because citizens have
accumulated large amount of social capital… [In other words, the] high levels of social
capital contribute to the creation of political culture that is open, pluralistic, deliberative,
tolerant and democratic.” In this way, Putnam’s classic work encouraged the researchers
to further develop the concept of political culture approach. The positive co-relation
between the social capital and political culture is observed as the high degree of the
former is linked with the latter’s development. The next section sheds light on the
major criticisms and deficiencies of the political culture approach.
Political Culture and Ideology
During the 1960s and 1970s, scholarly work on political culture was primarily confined
to the behavioural aspects. However, neo-Marxist scholars like Louis Althusser offered
an alternative perspective (with emphasize on the concept of ‘ideology’) to analyze
the role of culture in politics. According to Althusser, the “state has two key components:
repressive and ideological state apparatuses” (Rosamond, 1997: 66). The repressive
Self-Instructional apparatuses include the armed and law enforcement agencies like police and paramilitary
50 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

forces (function via coercion) while the latter include the family, educational institutions, NOTES
religion, and culture among others (operates ideologically). Interestingly, ideological
apparatus becomes significant to rule at times when the coercive ones could not function.
From this standpoint, “political culture becomes the prevailing value system and
knowledge structure which is dispersed throughout society by the dominant classes at
any given time” (Ibid., 65). In other words, political culture is not linked with the
political attitude and orientation of the members of the society, but it is a value system
of dominant classes that favours the governing class to maintain their political dominance
(hegemony), thus stabilizing the political order.
Subcultures
Some of the scholarly writings on political culture highlighted the fact that the existence
of one political culture across the nation was nothing more than an idealistic assumption.
It is very likely that many “political cultures may co-exist within any given political
system” rather than a single national political culture (Rosamond, 1997: 67). To develop
a comprehensive understanding about the interconnection between the culture and
political system, it is important to investigate “the interaction of different subcultures
and the impact of that interaction upon the political system as a whole” (Ibid). The
term ‘subculture’ refers to distinctive identity of diverse social groups and communities
in any given society. In the context of political culture, it refers to the existence of
different range of behaviours, opinions, orientations and attitudes possessed by the
different communities and social groups toward the political system. Dennis Kavanagh
in his work entitled “Political Culture” (1972), identifies “four distinct bases on which
subcultures develop: elite versus mass culture, cultural divisions within elites, generational
subcultures and social structure” (Ibid). In this way, these four bases produce different
sets of sub-culture in a society that have different social and political implications.

3.7 LIMITATION OF POLITICAL CULTURE

APPROACH

The political culture approach like any other approach of comparative politics has
attracted a stark criticism from the different political scientists. First and foremost,
critics argue that the proponents of this approach tend to depict a national political Self-Instructional
Material 51

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES culture of a communities and social groups in a given society. Rather, the scholars
“should have focused more on subcultures of race and class within the societies
examined” (Rod and Martin, 2004: 90). For example, it may be possible that people
within a community (based on race, class, caste, religion, and so on) may portray
different political culture owing to their personal satisfactions and way of lives.
Furthermore, scholarly works on the political culture approach did not offer a
comprehensive account of its origin and evolution in social science, which in turn created
obstacles in a way of developing a historical understanding of the concept (Ibid). On
the other side, political culture as an analytical method and tool employed principally in
the western democracies, for many years, to study the individuals’ political beliefs and
orientations towards politics (Bove, 2002: 1). It did not only limit the scope of the
political culture studies, but also made its analysis western dominated.
Edward W. Lehman alleges that the political culture approach has a “tendency
to ‘reduce’ cultural factors either to social system characteristics (especially to structure)
or to treat them as merely the statistical aggregation of the intrapsychic orientations of
the individual members of society” (Lehman, 1972: 362). This reductionist approach
offers a very narrow understanding of the cultural factors that shapes the national and
local politics. Furthermore, Lehman states that the cross-national survey method—
employed by Almond and Verba in their study of political culture in the five major
liberal democracies as discussed above—has inaccurately led us believe that “all the
members of society have equal ‘leverage’ in determining the dominant cultural patterns
or that all groups equally subscribe to them” (Ibid). Studies like M. Mann (1970) have
proven that people in a society act differently in a political domain and at the same
time, their individual capability to access the politics and its different institutions varies.
On the other side, critics claim that political culture approach intended to maintain
the status-quo and thus favouring the interests of the ruling elites. Lowell Dittmer noted
that “the concept of political culture was too fixated on systemic stability, as if the
absence of change required explanation” (Dittmer, 1974: 577). In other words, critics
found the approach conservative in term of its political consequences and thus, rejecting
the possibilities to bring change in a society. At times, the change in social as well as
political order is imperative to promote democracy and its basic values like justice,
fairness, and equality, etc. Nonetheless, these critics do not undermine the significance
of political culture approach in the study of comparative politics. In recent years,
Self-Instructional
52 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

scholars like Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel (2003) have attempted to address NOTES
these deficiencies and called for retaining this approach as a significant comparative
analytical tool in political science.

3.8 SUMMARY

Political culture is one of the key modern approaches in field of comparative politics.
It has enabled the political scientists and researchers to empirically analyze the interactions
between the individual behaviours and political system, and facilitated them in exploring
the significance of civic engagement in political stability and governmental effectiveness.
It is also observed that the emergence of political culture approach in modern
comparative politics has supplemented the “behaviouralist analysis of individual political
decisions,” and thus offering realistic explanations about the political phenomenon
(Bove, 2002: 3). However, scholarly efforts are required to revise the components
and scope of political culture approach so that it stays relevant with time.

3.9 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1. Write a short essay on modern approaches in the field of comparative

approaches.
2. Explain various limitations on structure functional approaches of Almond and
Powell.

3.10 REFERENCES

 Almond, Gabriel A. and Verba, Sydney. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political
Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Self-Instructional
Material 53

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES  Ball, Alan R. 1971. Modern Politics and Government. London: Macmillan.
 Bove, Andrew. 2002. The Limits of Political Cultures: An Introduction to G.W.F.
Hegel’s Notion of Bildung. In: A Bove. eds. Questionable Returns. Vienna:
IWM Junior Visiting Fellows Conference, Vol. 12.
 Dittmer, Lowell. 1974. Political Culture and Political Symbolism: Toward a
Theoretical Synthesis. World Politics, XXIX, accessed on 21 November 2020,
online available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2577258
 Formisano, Ronald P. 2001. The Concept of Political Culture. The Journal of
Interdisciplinary History, 31 (3), accessed on 04 November 2020, online
available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/207089
 Hague, Rod and Harrop, Martin. 2004. Comparative Government and
Politics: An Introduction. 6th Ed. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
 Inglehart, Ronald. 1988. The Renaissance of Political Culture. The American
Political Science Review, 82 (4), accessed on 18 November 2020, online
available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1961756
 Inglehart, Ronald and Welzel, Christian. eds. 2003. Political Culture and
Democracy: Analysing Cross-Level Linkage. Comparative Politics. 63 (1),
accessed on 21 November 2020, online available at: https://www.jstor.org/
stable/4150160
 Keeley, Brian. 2007. Human Capital: How What You Know Shapes Your
Life. 1st Ed., OECD: Paris.
 Kim, Young C. 1964. The Concept of Political Culture in Comparative Politics.
The Journal of Politics, 26 (2), accessed on 04 November 2020, online
available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2127599
 Lehman, Edward W. 1972. On the Concept of Political Culture: A Theoretical
Reassessment. Social Forces, 50 (3), accessed on 21 November 2020, online
available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2577040
 Powell, G. Bingham, Dalton, Russell J. and Strøm, Kaare W. 2015.
Comparative Politics Today: A World View. 11 Ed. Harlow: Pearson.
Self-Instructional
54 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Culture Approach

 Pye, Lucien W. and Sydney, Verba. eds. 1965. Political Culture and Political NOTES
Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
 Rosamond, Ben. 1997. Political Culture. In: Barrie Axford. et al. Politics: An
Introduction, London: Routledge, pp. 57-81.
 Rotberg, Robert I. 1999. Social Capital and Political Culture in Africa, America,
Australasia and Europe. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 29 (3),
accessed on 18 November 2020, online available at: https://www.jstor.org/
stable/207132

Self-Instructional
Material 55

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
New Institutionalism

LESSON 4 NOTES

NEW INSTITUTIONALISM
Yerramadasu Uday Kumar

Structure
4.1 Learning Objectives
4.2 Introduction
4.3 Historical Institutionalism
4.3.1 The Calculus Approach
4.3.2 The Cultural Approach
4.3.3 Criticism
4.4 Rational Choice Institutionalism
4.4.1 Criticism
4.5 Sociological Institutionalism
4.5.1 Criticism
4.6 Summary
4.7 Self - Assessment Questions
4.8 References

4.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this lesson, the students will be able to understand:

 Structuring Politics and Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis.
 Political science is the study of New Institutionalism.
 Difference between new institutionalism and the developing world.

Self-Instructional
Material 57

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
4.2 INTRODUCTION

In the book, Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative

Analysis, Kathleen Thelen and Sven Steinmo remarked, ‘Political science is the study
of institutions’, a senior colleague once remarked. ‘So what’s new about the New
Institutionalism?’ he asked. This question reveals a skepticism toward the so-called
new institutionalism that deserves attention. Political scientists, sociologists, and
economists have studied institutions for a very long time. “So what is all the fuss about?”
(Thelen and Steinmo 1992). In that essence, the new institutionalism is a contradiction
and a paradox. The concern of the study of politics is, always has been, and will
remain institutions. Institutions are the heart and soul of politics. It is not an exaggeration;
if there are no institutions, there are no politics either. Institutionalism is not an approach
among the multiple approaches to politics. Instead, the other approaches proceed
from taking for granted the rule governing institutions. If we take politics seriously, with
the seriousness that it deserves, the new institutionalism attempts not to go back to
institutions; to be fair, it attempts to go back to politics itself.
However, it is crucial not to overlook; not all institutions are political. Institutions,
sometimes, are resistant to what we conventionally call politics. Family, marriage,
religion, and numerous other institutions do not neatly subsume under politics. On the
contrary, they often seek to situate themselves outside the interference of politics. The
passionate feminist slogan, personal is political, in a way, is the rejection of the desire
of the family to stay outside the interference of politics. It might be helpful to reflect on
what we mean when we say something as politics or someone is doing politics. The
prevalent use of the term made it obscure. Politics is often used either as synonymous
with power or interest. While this view is widespread and has many supporters, it is
also the most impoverished notion of what constitutes politics.
For the sake of illustration, take a look at the slogan mentioned above for another
time; the personal is political. When politics are taken as interest and power, the
slogan seems contradictory. The slogan seems to suggest, the family and the personal
are outside power and interests, while that is absolutely untrue. Both the family and the
personal are deeply entrenched in power. The filial, the paternal, the fraternal and even
the maternal, none of them are outside the power. Instead, they are outside what
Self-Instructional
58 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
New Institutionalism

Hegel defined and later, Derrida reconceptualised the politics; it is neither interest nor NOTES
power; it is the ethical difference (Sittliche Differenz). Thus, politics is the contestation
over ethics. The family and the personal, if they are outside politics or if they seek to
be outside the politics, they do not seek to be outside power relations. Instead, they
seek to live outside the ethical contestation, and they seek to resist the ethical
contestation over the power relation intrinsic to them. With this, we made the concepts
complex instead of simplifying. However, that is, unfortunately, the only way to get to
the bottom of things. The institutions are all entrenching and possibly extend beyond
politics, then what is new about this new institutionalism within political science? Or, so
what is all the fuss about?
Any meaningful account of the New Institutionalism is possible only on the
condition that we elucidate, what is institutionalism in the first place and secondly, what
is new to the extent that it is distinct and yet is prefixed to the institutionalism. Thus, it
is unavoidable to give at least preliminary remarks on institutionalism. There are two
distinct ways in which institutionalism or every political category is to be analyzed.
While not utterly dissociable from one other, at least based on emphasis, every political
category can be analyzed philosophically or historically. A philosophical approach or
the conceptual approach considers the essential meaning of the concept, in this case,
the institution. It tries to differentiate the institution from other categories, such as the
opposing category, the individual.
On the other hand, the historical approach considers the evolution or consecutive
changes that the institutions underwent. The historical approach privileges context
over the concept. Nevertheless, despite these differences, the historical approach can
not dispense with a preliminary understanding of the question, what is an institution?
Thus, a preliminary definition is indispensable. So, what is an institution? We know of
the educational institutions, military institutions, medical institutions, and the list is almost
inexhaustible. An institution is an aggregate of individuals. While the aggregate of
individuals is the necessary condition for an institution, it is not sufficient. An institution
requires much more than a collection of individuals. Mobs and masses are a collection
of individuals, but they are not institutions.
James March and Johan Olsen define the institution as, “An institution is a relatively
enduring collection of rules and organized practices, embedded in structures of meaning
and resources that are relatively invariant in the face of turnover of individuals and Self-Instructional
Material 59

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES relatively resilient to the idiosyncratic preferences and expectations of individuals and
changing external circumstances.” (March and Olsen 1984) It is visible from the above
definition that individuals and the idiosyncratic preferences of the individuals are exactly
posed as opposing to one another. However, unlike the individual, an institution is
resilient, enduring and resistant to change. Maybe we might take a look at another
well-known definition. Peter Hall and Rosemary Taylor define institutions as “the formal
or informal procedures, routines, norms and conventions embedded in the organizational
structure of the polity or political economy. They can range from the rules of the
constitutional order or the standard operating procedures of a bureaucracy to the
conventions governing trade union behaviour or bank-firm relations.” (Hall and
Rosemary 1996).
So far, we defined what an institution is, defined politics, and gave preliminary
remarks about the interdependency of politics and institutions. Next, we will look at
the specific conditions under which the new institutionalism emerged. Institutionalism
as an approach to politics faded into the background with the outburst of behaviouralism
and rational choice approaches that dominated social sciences in the 1960s and ’70s.
Institutionalism suddenly started appearing outdated and metaphysical with the forceful
entry of behaviouralism and the rational choice approach. Though, both behaviouralism
and rational choice approaches disrupted the possibility of institutionalism to survive.
They wanted to analyze observable facts and predictable patterns. While institutions
survive, they are seen as nothing but the agents within which the self-seeking individuals
participate rather than institutions determining the individuals. It is self-evident the huge
aversion of the behaviouralism and rational choice approaches towards any theory is
not based on observable facts.
However, to sustain their claims, both theories need metaphysical assertions to
be the foundation. Thus, both theories propagated based on the metaphysics of the
individual. According to these theories, the individual is self-seeking, utility maximizing,
goal-oriented, calculative, atomized, and, to be precise, narcissistic. Rather than a
stable human attribute, the atomized and narcissistic individual is a characteristic trait
of the modern individual. Suppose Foucault painstakingly presents that the army and
the prisons with its investments in the microphysics of power produce the free subject
or what he calls the docile bodies. Thus, the narcissistic individual is not in a stable
human condition. Instead, it is institutionally constructed. This construal is the post-
Self-Instructional
60 Material structuralist catchphrase, ‘the subject formation’. “Institutions are not simply equilibrium

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
New Institutionalism

contracts among self-seeking, calculating individual actors or arenas for contending NOTES
social forces. They are collections of structures, rules, and standard operating
procedures that have a partly autonomous role in political life.” (March and Olsen
1984)
The new institutionalism is the escape from this outburst of behaviouralism and
rational choice approaches. Though the new institutionalism emerged from the
theoretical impasse of behaviouralism and the rational choice approach, it also deviated
from old institutionalism. More importantly, the new institutionalism is not one set of
unified approaches. Instead, it has multiple proponents and viewpoints. Considering
the vast body of literatures that emerged from the rejection of behaviouralism and the
rational choice approach, it is not advisable to restrict them to a single body of literature.
Despite the accepted redundancy of behaviouralism and the rational choice approach,
there is considerable disagreement among the different strands of new institutionalism
on the significance and insignificance of both approaches. Thus, Peter Hall and Rosemary
Taylor differentiate the new institutionalism into three broad subgroups. According to
them, these three subgroups within the new institutionalism comprise Historical
Institutionalism, Rational Choice Institutionalism, and Sociological Institutionalism. We
will individually look at these three approaches to see both the convergences and
divergences. However, both Hall and Taylor remark that despite their overlapping
interests and goals. It is surprising that they seldom come together for a fruitful
collaboration.

4.3 HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONALISM

To give a simple demonstration of historical institutionalism, we might look at Judith

Goldstein’s article, Ideas, Institutions, and American Trade Policy (1988). In this
work, she tried to explain protectionism in the United States. Unlike the common
perception, she noticed that rather than replacing one form of ideas with another, the
contradictory ideas about state policy such as Laissez-faire, protectionism and
interventionism simultaneously co-habit in the US. It is safe to suggest that this
phenomenon might be true of other regions as well. Based on this layering of ideas,
she concludes, ‘a society embalmed in the “rule of law”, legal constraints encourage Self-Instructional
Material 61

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES the layering, rather than the replacing of government institutions’ (Goldstein 1988).
Instead of the efficient and rational approach replacing the less efficient counterpart,
her research suggests, the contradictory ideas tend to persist. Such an analysis is
made possible only by historical institutionalism. It evaluates the institutions over a long
period to observe the changes and continuities.
Before proceeding, it might be helpful to mention some of the significant
contributors and works that laid the foundations and continue to inspire historical
institutionalism. A few prominent figures include Suzanne Berger, Theda Skocpol,
Douglas Ashford, Peter Hall, Rosemary Taylor, John Ikenberry, Stephen Skowrone.K,
and Peter Katzenstein. These are some prominent scholars who shaped historical
institutionalism and gave new impetus to the new institutionalism in political science.
However, the list is not exhaustive. Historical institutionalism is too broad to restrict it
to a handful of academics. It might be helpful to note a few notable works in the field
as well. Peasants Against Politics: Rural Organization in Brittany, 1911-1967(1972)
and The French Political System (1974) by Suzanne Berger deserves special mention.
Small states in world markets (1985) and Cultural Norms and National Security
(1996) by Katzenstein, States and Social Revolutions (1979) and Social policy in
the United States (1995) by Skocpol, Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the
State: The Case of Economic Policy Making in Britain (1990) by Peter A. Hall,
Reasons of State: Oil Politics and the Capacities of American Government (1988)
by John Ikenberry and Building a new American state (1982) by Stephen Skowronek
are some of the critical and unavoidable works on historical institutionalism.
What is historical institutionalism? Historical institutionalism emerged from the
rejection of behaviouralism and rational choice approaches. However, what is not
clear is from where historical institutionalism took inspiration? From where does the
impetus come? “The idea of socially and politically constructed preferences that figures
prominently in the work of many contemporary historical institutionalists echoes the
writings of an earlier generation of economic institutionalist-historians” (Hall and
Rosemary 1996). Peter Hall and Rosemary Taylor mention two approaches that gave
impetus to historical institutionalism. Among them, one is group theories and the second
is structural-functionalism. The group theories of politics articulated the politics based
on conflict, and such a conflict, in their view, is always based on scarce resources.
Thus, for the group theories, politics is essentially based on the contestation over
Self-Instructional
62 Material scarce resources. This mode of analysis made the group theories proximate to Marxism

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
New Institutionalism

and class analysis. However, historical institutionalism seeks to distance itself from NOTES
both Marxism and group theories on the grounds that both theories deal with broad
contestations, they fail to explain the intermediate level conflicts. They tend to ignore
the national and institutional differences that affect both policy outcomes and space for
contestation.
Suppose, in her work, States and Social Revolutions (1979), Skocpol
demonstrates the inadequacy of the class analysis to explain the political dynamics of
the states and social revolutions. In her book, she tried to compare social revolutions
in France, China, and South Africa. She notes, “Working strictly in terms of class
analysis, it was difficult to conceptualize, let alone adequately explain, the structure of
the South African state and the political role of the Afrikaners” (Skocpol 1979). There
is a remarkable distinction among countries and how the working class in specific
countries articulate their demands. Broad theoretical generalization, though it guides
the analysis, the permutations and combinations of the interest articulation and ‘the
mobilization of biases’ are outside the scope of Marxism. “Criticizing the ahistorical
approach of traditional interest-group theories and Marxist analysis alike, these theorists
wanted to know why interest groups demanded different policies in different countries
and why class interests were manifested differently cross-nationally” (Thelen and Steinmo
1992). While the echo of Marxism is alive in the historical institutionalism as a tool kit
and a compass, the methods, micro-level tactics and ‘the logics of appropriateness’
are incorporated anew. Marxism remained to inform the theoretical outlook, while
historical institutionalism made headway into the analysis of historical and regional
specificities. The influence of Marxism is evident in the vocabulary of the historical
institutionalists. For example, they emphasize the changes in institutions in terms of
‘critical junctures,’ which cause disruption in the existing institutional structure by enabling
a ‘branching point’ and pave the way for new institutional structures.
Apart from the Marxist class analysis, the emergence of historical institutionalism
is attributable to another legacy, structural-functionalism. However, unlike the class
analysis, structural-functionalism does not base the analysis on a conflicting class or
group interest. Instead, for structural-functionalism, the system is an aggregate of
interacting parts or groups, which brings it closer to the aims and goals of historical
institutionalism. However, one crucial qualificatory remark is necessary before
comparing both. Historical institutionalism is akin or proximate to structuralism rather
Self-Instructional
than the functionalism of structural-functionalism. Central to the approach is the question; Material 63

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES it is well established that institutions mould, structure, and to some extent, determine
the individual behaviour, but how do institutions perform such a role? To this question,
Rosemary and Hall respond with two approaches within historical institutionalism; one
is the calculus approach and the other is the cultural approach.

4.3.1 The Calculus Approach

Between the calculus and calculative approach, the calculus approach takes into account
individuals as strategic, calculative, and instrumental. However, these traits do not
operate independently of the institutions. Individuals are strategic but that strategy is
confined within the parameters set by the institutions. They calculate their actions in
accordance with other actors and rules, codes and persistent notions of the institutions.
Moreover, the instrumentality is institutionally mandated. Even though individuals and
political actors are instrumental, they “organize themselves and act in accordance with
rules and practices which are socially constructed, publicly known, anticipated, and
accepted” (March and Olsen 1984). One can even argue, the instrumentality of an
individual is socially constructed and publicly accepted. However, the calculus approach
is careful not to entertain such an opinion. Unlike the cultural approach, it still emphasizes
individual calculation at the centre of the analysis.

4.3.2 The Cultural Approach

Contrary to the calculus approach, the cultural approach characterizes the individual
as a satisficer instead of a utility maximizer. “Taking preference formation as problematic
rather than given, it then also follows that alliance formation is more than a lining up of
groups with compatible (pre-existing and unambiguous) self-interests” (Hall and
Rosemary 1996). According to the cultural approach, an individual follows ‘the
established routine’ instead of constantly seeking to maximize utility. It is not to say that
individuals are not rational and utility maximizing. But such traits are part of the
established routine rather than the conscious goal-oriented activity of the individual. In
other words, the institution demands the individual through the established routine to
be purposive and goal-oriented. Utility maximization is demanded and enforced by
the individual to be a part of an institution.
Self-Instructional
64 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
New Institutionalism

4.3.3 Criticism NOTES

The strength of historical institutionalism is its eclectic character. However, the eclectic
character is the source of its significant criticism as well. While eclecticism is its strength,
it is also its greatest weakness. Because of its ability to take and incorporate the new
horizons to understand institutions, it never developed a reliable model for interpreting
the interrelation between the individual and the institution as elaborately as the other
institutionalists.

4.4 RATIONAL CHOICE INSTITUTIONALISM

In the 1970s, scholars deeply engaged in the rational choice approach began to raise
some doubts and concerns pertaining to the efficacy of their approach. These doubts
are specific to congressional behaviour. The strict adherence to the notions of rational
choice such as utility maximizing and strategic calculations are expected to result in the
constant formation and dissolution of the majorities in policymaking. If individuals in
Congress are strategic, they have no reason to participate in majorities where their
interest is not placed. According to the expectations, this pattern should cause a ‘cycling
effect’ in which the possibility of any observable majority is impossible. However,
contrary to the expectations, the majorities in the congressional legislature are reasonably
stable. Rational choice institutionalism emerged out of this impasse to account for the
evident discrepancy in their articulation. Thus, these theorists looked for explanations
in institutionalism while simultaneously adhering to the foundational notions of rational
choice.
Control of choices and agenda setting are two essential components of institutions
that rational choice institutionalism considers along with the assumptions of the rational
choice approaches. Individuals are still strategic, calculative, and utility maximizers.
However, those aspects of the individuals are either enhanced or diminished nonetheless,
certainly structured by institutions. Thus, institutions control the choices and set an
agenda for the individual to try and maximize their utility. In this direction, it took
inspiration and tools from ‘the new economics of organization’. By taking inspiration
from these approaches, the rational choice institutionalism postulates, the institution
Self-Instructional
Material 65

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES reduces transaction costs and uncertainties. Thus, the utility maximization individuals
are still operative, but in an institution in which the choices are controlled, agendas are
already set, transaction costs are immensely reduced, and uncertainties are mitigated.
However, a critical distinction with the other approaches to institutionalism deserves
mention here. Unlike the other approaches, rational choice institutionalism still adheres
to the notion that the individuals are driven not by impersonal and unmeasurable forces
of history or society. They are driven purely on rational and personal motivation. Even
when the individual is forced to collaborate and act according to the institutionalist
paradigm, the reasons are personal and strategic calculations. They are not collective
in essence. Thus, for rational choice institutionalism, institutions’ formation and continued
existence are based on benefits that the institutions offer to the individuals. In this
sense, the institution is the voluntary formation of individuals.
In recent years, rational choice institutionalism expanded from congressional
structure analysis into more broad research areas. These areas include deliberations
among the political parties, the relationship between Congress and courts, the
relationship between Congress and regulatory agencies. It also expanded influence
into the discipline of international relations. This approach has been applied to
international institutions, cross-national competitions and negotiations.

4.4.1 Criticism

It is self-evident by now that rational choice institutionalism is akin to rational choice

theories, which suffer from the criticism of the characterization of the individual. While
its theories are often applicable in broader frames, they tend to obscure when applied
to smaller samples.

4.5 SOCIOLOGICAL INSTITUTIONALISM

Unlike both historical institutionalism and rational choice institutionalism, to some extent,
sociological institutionalism is counterintuitive. It emerged as a counter measure to
destabilize the notion that while bureaucratic institutions are rational and operate on
efficiency, the other aspects of society are mere culture. Sociological institutionalism
Self-Instructional
66 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
New Institutionalism

problematizes this distinction. Bureaucracy indeed operates on the principle of rationality NOTES
and efficiency, but such an operation is cultural rather than rational. Rationality is as
much part of the culture as myth and ceremonies. While the premodern forms of
organization are based on myth and ceremonies, the modern culture operates on
rationality and efficiency. Thus, it argues that the bureaucratic institutions’ self-evident
rationality ought to be elaborated and theorized in cultural terms. Since the interpretations
of bureaucracy by Weber, at least within sociology, the bureaucratic rationality is not
something that emerged from nowhere but deeply entrenched inside the cultural forms
that predated it. The bureaucratic rationality has its roots in the western religious life
where the rationality is already embedded. The practices of the bureaucracy are neither
formed nor sustained because they are either rational or efficient. They are both formed
and sustained because they have been culturally embedded in the western cultural
forms.
Sociological institutionalism emphasizes, there are apparent symbolic and
ritualistic forms even the rational bureaucracy adheres to, and these forms ought to be
considered for the analysis in much broader terms. In their efforts to break down the
distinction between institution and culture, sociological institutionalists consider
institutions in much broader terms than traditionally defined by institutionalism. It takes
into account ‘the frame of meaning’. The frame of meaning is a broad network of
rules, procedures and norms, and symbolic and moral cognates. This way, it
incorporates aspects not incorporated into the definition of the institutions before and
widens its scope and meaning. The institutions that are not studied before and relegated
as mere culture is incorporated and analyzed. This broadening is possible because of
the widened definition attached to the institutions.
The second crucial intervention by sociological institutionalism is its emphasis
on the cognitive dimension. What is the cognitive dimension? We are acquainted with
the idea that institutions shape individual behaviour; however, the cognitive dimension
is not just normative but also cognitive scripts, models, and categories for the individual
actions. Without such categories and models, individual action is impossible. In other
words, institutions, according to sociological institutionalism, not just offer appropriate
and inappropriate codes, and they do not just offer strategic avenues; they offer the
very frames from which the strategic, appropriate, and calculations work. The cognitive
dimension provides the necessary field for the action to be meaningful in the first place
Self-Instructional
based on which the individual roles are performed in an institution. The individual in an Material 67

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES institution is not merely embedded in it. The individual holds a position and is situated
in a specific role. Suppose a teacher in an institution is not an individual who performs
the role of teacher. Instead, the individual becomes the teacher, demands respect from
the students, performs duties of teaching, and participates in the building of the institution.
The teacher is more of a role than a performance. Thus, the role already pre-establishes
the expectations.
The actions of the individuals are neither strategic nor calculative. They are
institutionally structured roles. They prescribe the frames of advantage and disadvantage
so that individuals act within the given frame to either enhance or diminish. The frames
are already culturally specified so that individuals can act. Therefore, sociological
institutionalism is interpretative. It is not to suggest that individuals are not purposive,
strategic, and goal-oriented. What is strategic and goal-oriented is already socially
mandated or socially constructed. Thus, if there are any institutional changes, they do
not stem from rationality and efficiency. They stem from the broader legitimacy of the
cultural milieu that the institution is functioning. Instead of the rationality and efficiency
that bureaucracy hails, sociological institutionalism emphasizes legitimacy and social
appropriateness. Change, continuity, and functioning of an institution are based on the
changing yardsticks of legitimacy and social appropriateness.

4.5.1 Criticism

The major criticism against sociological institutionalism comes from historical

institutionalism. Sociological institutionalism takes no account of the conflict and struggles
inherent within the institutions for power and resource control. Another major criticism
is that by emphasizing the continuity between institutions and culture, sociological
institutionalism erases the historical ruptures that gave shape to the new bureaucratic
institutions.

4.6 SUMMARY

The new institutionalism is just the revival of the old institutionalism. By carefully
elaborating the interaction between the individual and the institutions, it revitalized the
Self-Instructional
68 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
New Institutionalism

old institutionalism. In that process, it gave new direction and impetus to the institutions. NOTES
The new institutionalism is a new space for dialogue among the competing tendencies
and theories within political science. It opened up space for dialogue along with other
approaches such as behaviouralism, rational choice approach, structuralism,
functionalism, Marxism, post-structuralism, and structural-functionalism. Despite the
rational choice being one of its constituents, the new institutionalism goes beyond the
definition of an institution as a collection of individuals voluntarily joined together to
maximize their utility. An institution is more complex and multifaceted than a mere
aggregate of individuals. Historical institutionalism is successful in bringing the conflict
to the core of the institutional analysis. Unlike functionalism, because of historical
institutionalism, power, conflict, and struggle became central features to conceptualize
institutions. It also brought to light the unequal power that some actors are able to
mobilize over others.
The common phrase in the vocabulary of the old institutionalism, ‘the mobilization
of biases’, has become the central component in the analysis and explanations of the
new institutionalism. Moreover, it has attained special status owing to the diverse fields
with which the new institutionalism engages over a long period. While Marxism and
post-structuralism analyzed the broader historical and cultural variations, the new
institutionalism, in many respects, gave significant material support for those theories
at the microlevel. Though none of the three institutionalists agrees on familiar ground at
the core, they have considerable space to merge and dialogue with one another at the
margins. Many rational choice theorists are now less averse to cultural and historical
analysis. There is greater emphasis placed on working together across multiple strands
of new institutionalism.

4.7 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1. What is the relationship between Institutionalism and Neo-Institutionalism?

2. Write an explanation on Neo-Institutionalism and its different types of it.

Self-Instructional
Material 69

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
4.8 REFERENCES

 Collier, D and Collier, R. B. (1991), Shaping the Political Arena: Critical

Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Downing, Brian. (1992), The Military Revolution and Political Change, Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
 Goldstein, Judith. (1988), Ideas, Institutions, and American Trade Policy,
International Organization, Winter, 1988, Vol. 42, No. 1, The State and
American Foreign Economic Policy (Winter, 1988), pp. 179-217: The MIT
Press.
 Hall, A.P and Taylor, C.R.R. (1996), Political Science and the Three New
Institutionalisms.
 March, G. J and Olsen, P. J. (1984), The New Institutionalism: Organisational
Factors in Political Life, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 78,
No. 3, pp. 734-749.
 Orren, K and Skowronek, S. (2004), The Search for American Political
Development, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Skocpol, Theda. (1979), States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative
Analysis of France, Russia, and China, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
 Skocpol, Theda. (1996), Social policy in the United States: Future
Possibilities in Historical Perspective, New York: Princeton University Press.
 Thelen, K and Steinmo, S. (1992), Structuring Politics: Historical
Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Self-Instructional
70 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Unit III

Lesson 5 Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical

Institutionalism, Rational Choice Theory and
Sociological Institutionalism
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

LESSON 5 NOTES

TRADITIONAL AND NEO-INSTITUTIONALISM:

HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONALISM, RATIONAL
CHOICE THEORY AND SOCIOLOGICAL
INSTITUTIONALISM
Shikha Jaiswal
Research Scholar,
Department of Political Science, DU
Structure
5.1 Learning Objectives
5.2 Introduction
5.3 Traditional Approaches to Comparative Politics
5.3.1 Philosophical Approach
5.3.2 Historical Approach
5.3.3 Formal and Legal Approach
5.3.4 Problematic Approach
5.3.5 Configurative Approach
5.3.6 Regional/ Area Approach
5.3.7 Structural-functional Approach
5.4 Criticism of Traditional Comparative Politics
5.5 Emergence of the New Institutional Approach
5.5.1 What is the New Institutionalism Approach?
5.6 Three Models of New institutionalism
5.6.1 Historical Institutionalism
5.6.2 Rational-Choice Institutionalism
5.6.3 Sociological Institutionalism
5.7 Old and New Historical Institutionalism: A Comparison
5.8 New Institutionalism and the Developing World
5.9 Various Thinkers
5.10 Summary
5.11 Self - Assessment Questions
5.12 References
Self-Instructional
Material 73

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
5.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this lesson, the students will be able to:

 Comprehend the concept of comparative politics.
 Distinguish between historical, rational-choice,s and sociological institutionalism.
 Understand the difference between new institutionalism and the developing world.

5.2 INTRODUCTION

The political world is extremely complex, involving two range of institutions, actors,
and ideas that interact on a non-stop ground to give governance to society. The
complexity of politics and government is compounded when we say to understand
several different political systems and compare the ways in which these systems function.
As comparative politics has moved further simple descriptions of individual countries
or many institutions, scholars have needed substantial guidance to sort through the
huge measure of testimony available, and to concentrate on the most applicable
information. Therefore, we need to develop necessary approaches in politics and
particularly to develop approaches that are useful across a range of political systems.
Political theories are the source of these approaches for comparison. At the
broadest position, there is a difference between positivist and constructivist approaches
to politics, and to social life more considerably. At lower general levels, a number of
different theories enable the relative political scientist to put some logical meanings on
the political phenomena being observed and to relate that evidence back to a further
comprehensive understanding of politics. Each of the approaches discussed provides
some important information about politics, but many are sufficient to capture the
complexity.
All governments struggle with complex global issues i.e. the need to accommodate
different racial and religious self-identities, the struggle to make better profitable security
and growth, the search to give a strong ground for public citizenship, and the trouble to
Self-Instructional managing demands for democracy and participation. There are varieties of similar
74 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

cases with many different forms of culture, political democracy, state administration, NOTES
and public programs.

5.3 TRADITIONAL APPROACHES TO

COMPARATIVE POLITICS

The study of comparative politics is often done in formal institutions, if we compare it

with modern approaches, we will find methodology and emphasis is on the importance
of politics. However, on emphasized scope of approaches, largely, the initiatives of
comparative studies were done in this tradition only, therefore, comparative studies
cannot be considered less than traditional approaches. According to the approach of
Harry Extin, the major traditional ways are:

Traditional Approaches to Comparative Politics

Philosophical Approach Configurative Approach

Historical Approach Sturctural-functional

approach
Formal & Legal Approach
Regional approach
Problematic approach

5.3.1 Philosophical Approach

Comparative politics has been used since the study of the philosophical approach,
from Plato to Hegel various thinkers have adopted and used the philosophical approach.
This approach used the deductive method. In this method, first, the conclusions are
drawn, then the scientific basis is tried and an attempt is made to check them.
The biggest drawback of this method was that it had no relation with the facts,
in addition to this, it was seen that it is very difficult to adopt the ideals propounded by Self-Instructional
Material 75

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES philosophers in practice. This is the reason that Plato’s ideal state and Sir Thomas
Moore’s Atopia cannot be established on the earth, so the philosophical approach has
come to its limits, but it has been very limited in time and its use.

5.3.2 Historical Approach

It also has special importance in the traditional approaches to the study of comparative
politics. The historical approach has also been widely used in western thought. In
these thoughts, Aristotle, Mastrosque, Hegel, Henry Man Jacques, and MacIver are
the main names. These thoughts gave birth to political theories based on historical
analysis. For example,
Aristotle has explained the production and survival of the state on the basis of
history. On the other hand, Karl Marx gave an economic interpretation of history.
According to him, along with the change in history, there is also a change in religion,
morality, and the political system.
MacIver also considered history as the basis of the origin and development of
the state, in this way we can see that various thinkers adopted the historical method in
a wide way.
Later on, the historical political evolutionary approach was only taken. These
evolutionary political theories have been an important contribution to the development
of the comparative approach. In fact, a comparative study showed that the historical
approach has only enriched the living.
Contrary to the above-mentioned contributions of approaches such as
governance, there are many problems associated with it, and only one additional
approach can be used in the study of politics to the extent that it is historical. Historical
events are different by their different authors while studying politics.
Another problem with the historical method is that past events and experiences
should not be given more importance than necessary because history does not always
repeat itself. It is often seen that the historical method gives birth to more questions
than it solves. History exposes only one side, whereas the field of comparative politics
is very vast.

Self-Instructional
76 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

5.3.3 Formal and Legal Approach NOTES

Many independent countries have created their own constitutions and comparative
political analysis has made the basis of its study on the constitution, law, administration,
policy-making, and bureaucracy. The names of Theodore Bullseye, Budrow Wilson,
Diuti, etc. are particularly notable among the thinkers who adopted formal and legal
approaches. Even after the rise of modern approaches, their importance remained,
which is why writers like Carter, Herz, Newman, etc. adopted it.
Legal and formal approach arrival is criticized on many grounds because under
these approaches, formal institutions, laws, and constitutions are over-emphasized
and other socio-economic psychological factors are not given much attention.
It is often seen that the statements, which are true from the legal point of view,
do not come true from the political point of view also. For example, in Britain the
Parliament is supreme, but in practice, it is not like that. The study done on the basis of
the formal and legal approach is more descriptive and less analytical.

5.3.4 Problematic Approach

Analysts of the comparative study identified various problematic areas and adopted
traditional approaches to solving them. Democracy and economic planning, Panchayati
Raj and women’s representation, administrative development, degradation of a binary
system, division of power, decentralization of power, etc. were their main subjects.
Such studies were mainly concerned with formal institutions and structures.
Some thinkers also suggested reforms in these formal institutions. After this type
of study, such as – reorganization of the House of Lords, development of functional
representative assemblies, the establishment of economic unions, handing over of power
to the executive, and allowing business groups to participate in policy-making. Providing
an opportunity for integration of organs involved in policymaking and finding ways to
prevent the development of anti-democratic parties in democratic systems etc.
The biggest advantage of the contemporary approach was that it made a
significant contribution to solving the problems of traditional formal sectors as well as
paved a way for the coming times as to how the problematic approach can be applied
to the behaviour of more human beings and political institutions and other social
Self-Instructional
economic institutions. Material 77

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES 5.3.5 Configurative Approach

The drafting method was developed after the historical and legal approaches. Under
this method, considering each state’s governance, law, and constitution as unique, the
political system of that country is studied in the context of that particular country and
not in comparison. It thus proved to be a simple approach. Under this method, data
and facts are first collected and then a comparative study is done. This approach was
used by many political thinkers, in which the names of Newman, Carter, Herz, Rocher,
Finte, etc. are prominent.
In contrast to being very simple, many defects are found in it, so it was also
criticized. A group of thinkers believes that this approach is too regionally descriptive
and comparative. Although one of its features that cannot be denied and it is often the
best way to do a comparative study, by first studying the political system of a country,
a comparative analysis is provided with a solid base, sufficient material, and then a
different political comparative study of systems becomes possible. If social and
economic factors are also included in the study of different political systems, this
approach can be made more scientific.

5.3.6 Regional/Area Approach

The native approach to the study of relative politics can be useful after the Second
World War a new trend is seen in the study of arbitration of politics. Thinkers made
the politics of developing and underdeveloped countries the focal point of their study
and therefore the native approach began to be used vastly. According to Macridis, the
study of such an area is done in this approach where all the countries have the same
socio-economic and political uniformity so that no disagreement can be set up in this
relative study with unity. Using this indigenous form, we can firm the opinion of why the
self-government is safe or secure in a country.
The conclusions that are drawn after analyzing the different conditions of different
countries can be useful for the analysis of the world system established after the Second
World War in a true sense.
Despite all these advantages, the Regional approach isn’t truly good for
comparative study because it isn’t necessary that the countries which have social-
Self-Instructional
78 Material
economic and political uniformity may be geographically close to each other.

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

Various thinkers have followed the regional approach and written numerous NOTES
books. Some of the books are; “Democracy and party movement in pre-war Japan”
by Robert Scalapino, “Soviet politics: the dilemma of power” by Barrington Moore,
and “How Russia is ruled” by Merle Fainsod. In modern times, when the interdisciplinary
approach is becoming truly popular, the study based on the regional or geographical
approach is not fruitful. The authors gave a new direction to comparative study based
on Economics, Sociology, Anthropology, Linguistics, and political science.

5.3.7 Structural-Functional Approach

In modern times, the structural-functional approach is broadly used to study comparative

politics. Under this approach, the study of institutions is equally important to their
functionality. If we focus only on the study of institutions and organizations rather than on
functionality, then our study is not complete. Therefore, equal emphasis should be given
to the organizational and functional parts of political institutions. Under this approach, the
study was done in totality. The whole political system was brought into the field of study
and that whole system was seen as a unit. Herman Finer, Karl Fredrich, Maurice Duverger,
K.C. Wheare, etc. are the main proponents of this approach.
The structural-functional approach has provided a modern insight into the
comparative study to a large extent. Although along with being modern, this approach
also took totality, but numerous defects are also seen in this approach, which are as
follows:
I. There is a special quality of political studies - mobility. We can use any
approach in comparative studies, but indeed, in that approach, the ability
to study the dimensions related to this mobility is necessary but the
institutional functional approach does not give a sufficient basis for
understanding the dynamics, because under this approach only stable
relations of different political systems are considered.
II. Any institution performs different functions in different situations. It is not
necessary that any institution perform the same functions in all countries.
Therefore, the conclusions deduced by the structural-functional approach
cannot always be a universal truth. For example, the functioning democracy,
parliament, political parties, election commission, etc. differ from each
Self-Instructional
other to a great extent, in all the countries. Material 79

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
5.4 CRITICISM OF TRADITIONAL COMPARATIVE
POLITICS

While using any approach in the study of comparative politics, it is necessary to be

careful and aware beforehand, so that our conclusions and theories are correct. It is
often seen that despite the prevailing political situation, diversity is found in the political
scenario in the countries. Therefore, for a comprehensive study of comparative politics,
it is necessary to study the cultural, social, economic, and ethical dimensions as well.
There is a need to deepen the analysis beyond the formal study of traditional
approaches. In addition to formal studies, the study of informal sectors of political
behaviour, interdisciplinary method, functioning of institutions, etc. has also become
necessary. In this context, Macridis has pointed out some drawbacks of the study of
traditional comparative politics as follows:
1. The study of traditional comparative politics, was limited to western countries.
Democratic governance system is often found in western countries, so all
the governance systems other than democracy could not become a part of
this comparative study. The result of this was that the developing countries,
the less developed countries, and their governance systems and political
system remained in the comparative study. Therefore, on this basis, the
traditional approach cannot be called comparative and if it is called, its basis
has been very limited and narrow.
2. The Comparative studies done under traditional approaches have been very
formal. The whole comparative study of democracy, parliament,
administration, citizen, legislature, executive, etc. has been around the formal
word which is real but mostly not proved to be so beneficial for study.
3. In traditional approach, more emphasis was given on the method of
description whereas under comparative study, analysis, verification, the study
of political behaviour, fact collection, etc. have special importance. Therefore,
we can say that the study of comparative study through traditional approach
has been one sided. The study done by traditional approaches was neither
systematic nor scientific.
Self-Instructional
80 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

4. The traditional approach centered around the descriptive side and did not NOTES
give more attention to the problem side resultantly, when the problem side
was not recognized the solution side was also not taken care of. Political
science is related to humans so that its nature should be like that which finds
the solutions to the problems that comes in human life but the traditional
approach does not seem to be successful on the ground of solution side.
The implication of the above criticisms is not that these approaches are of no
importance. When the comparative politics was started, the form of institutions and
political system was very simple, as a result the traditional approach is very effective
for comparative study, but in further course of time institutions and form of politics
becomes more difficult and traditional approach was not effective in comparative
analysis and modern approaches were required. Although traditional approaches gives
‘input’ to the analysis done by modern approaches.

5.5 EMERGENCE OF THE NEW INSTITUTIONAL

APPROACH

The new institutionalist approach has its roots in the early to mid-1980s. In late 20th
century, many factors contributed for emergence of new institutional approach.

Old Institutionalism
Behaviourism

Study of behaviour by Study of Institutions by

scientific method traditional and formal method

Coordination

New Institutionalism

Self-Instructional
Material 81

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES 1. Traditional studies were rejected by the behaviourists. Whereas objective studies
were emphasized and neo-institutionalists tried to establish coordination and
harmony between scientific method of study and traditional approach of
behaviourists and in traditional approach institutions were studied through
constitution. While the neo-institutionalists studied the institutions in a scientific
way and tried to see it in the social context as well. In order to understand
better, it is necessary to study human behaviour (1984, James G. By March and
John Olson).
2. In comparative politics, after the traditional approach, the institutions were
completely neglected and the main emphasis was given on the function and
environment of the political system. But the importance of institutions was re-
accepted by the neo-institutionalists.
3. Provisional factors: Decolonization and emerging of new states in old colonies
have shown that the role of the state is very necessary for shaping political
behaviour. In the developing world also, broadcasting of the ‘welfare state’ in
some western and modern countries has changed the focusing way in studies.
There are many effective and new ways through which democracy of new political
institutions came into light, which threw a good image in understanding and
studying them. Today, states and institutions played a very important role which
somehow threw an image that the study of politics cannot be complete if the
proper and appropriate focus is not given to it.
4. Debates within the discipline: In the discipline of political science, state has
always been in a mysterious place. When the study of the state and the study of
politics began, an upcoming generation of scientists like Easton and Almond
said that the state is still not clear in concept to understand the real political
reasons of the society. We have to study the state to understand how it is affected
and influenced by different operations of society. With this change and concept
towards the state can lead to increased interest in institutions to understand the
detailed version of the political process into it.

5.5.1 What is the New Institutional Approach?

New Institutional Approach is a methodological approach in the study of political

Self-Instructional
82 Material science, started in the United States that explores how institutional structures, rules,

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

norms, and cultures constrain the choices and actions of individuals when they are part NOTES
of a political institution. This Approach became dominant around 1980s in US.
New institutionalism tries to combine the interests of traditionalist scholars, who
focused on studying formal institutional rules and structures, with behaviouralist scholars,
who examined the actions of individual political actors.
It believes that studying individual political behaviour without examining
institutional constraints on that behaviour gives a skewed understanding of political
reality. New-Institutionalism is a Post-Behavioural Approach.
Institutions have special importance in political life. The fact that political
behaviour of the workers is also inspired by the organizations to which they belong.
Under political science, ‘power’ and ‘institutions’ have been studied from the beginning.
The importance of institutions cannot be denied even in the modern governance system.
The importance of institutions is also because it is through them that the political leaders
exercise power and use the resources of organizations. On the basis of institutions, the
student of political science tries to understand political parties, election system,
bureaucracy, parliament, constitution, and judicial system and sees them as ‘state’.
Apart from this, he also studies some supranational such as United Nations, International
Monetary Fund, European Union, and also studies some non-governmental
organizations such as trade unions, etc.
Determining the boundary of any one entity is not a simple task as it is not just
the name of a ‘thing’ it is also a ‘process’ which plays an important role in determining
individual behaviour. An institution is actually a set of established laws, customs or
practices. Therefore, while studying the institutions, it is not only necessary to understand
the formal rules and regulations, but it is also necessary to understand the informal
methods. There are many ways in the institutions in which people imbibe and they
become included in their habits and behaviour. These cannot be seen directly.
Normally a distinction is not made between an ‘institution’ and an ‘organization’
but there is a difference between them. Often organizations work within different
organizations and are also inspired by them. Institutions are in a way the form of some
organizational relations based on which the role, rules, or behaviour of individuals are
determined. Institutions are of special importance in political life because they are
driven by interdependent rules and day-to-day activities. What a person will do depends
Self-Instructional
Material 83

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES on what the situation is and what his role is. Such requirements may be voluntary and
may also be valid on the basis of law or regulations (North, 1990: 384-85).
Some political analysts also believe that institutions are important because they
help determine the powers and preferences of political actors (Levi, 1990: 407). For
example, people who work in the government treasury are more powerful than other
government employees because they have control over government expenditure (Hall,
1986: 19). Often institutions are seen ‘above’ the actors but ‘below’ the various structural
forces. ‘Structural forces’ may include the domestic or international economy or politics.
In addition, we should not forget that many other factors influence our behaviour such
as class relations. Apart from this, one’s interest in institutions can be less or more.
Yes, it does not always remain the same. That is why it is necessary to understand
‘new institutionalism’.
In the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, the comparative study
of political science often gave more importance to the formal institutions of the
government and the state, the laws, and the systems of public administration politics.
In political science, it is now known as ‘classical institutionalism’ and ‘legal formal
historical study’. In this type of study, special attention was not given to finding general
principles, unlike modern studies. In this, attention was often paid to the description of
events, not their analysis. At that time, it was often believed that the political behaviour
of the individual is inspired by the formal rules and laws, which are created by various
institutions.
After the Second World War, the practice of behavioural studies started in the
United States of America and to understand the political behaviour of the person, an
attempt was made to understand the informal behaviour also, for which the study of
non-governmental organizations also became necessary. Now, in place of ‘State’ and
‘Government’, attention was also started towards the institutions related to ‘Society’.
Politics is now seen as a struggle for power.
Political scholars such as March and Olson believed that political events can be
understood at the level of private behaviour of individuals and ‘behaviouralist’ can be
combined with ‘utilitarianism’ because in practice human behaviour is self-interested.
He is motivated by reason and not by his duties or responsibilities (March and Olsen
1984: 735).
Self-Instructional
84 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

Due to ‘neo-institutionalism’, since the 1980s, the importance of institutions in NOTES

the study of political science has again been given. There were many reasons for this.
From the 1980s onwards, the influence of socio-political and economic institutions
began to grow (March and Olsen, 1984: 734). Secondly, political scholars were again
interested in the ‘state’ as its role and dominance increased during the welfare states.
Third, political science researchers wanted to know why different countries were
following different political and institutional paths in the 1970s and 1980s despite
similar economic difficulties. Fourth, they also wanted to know why there was a rapid
emphasis on reforming public enterprises and changing the role of the state during this
period (Bell, 1997).
The importance of the study of institutions was increasing not only in political
science but also in economics and sociology. In order to understand various political
or economic phenomena of all humanities and social sciences, emphasis was laid on
understanding social processes and an interdisciplinary study method was adopted so
that the overall truth could be understood. In political science, new institutionalism was
adopted again in place of ‘behaviouralist’. Where in behaviourism the emphasis was
on the individual nature of the individual, under new institutionalism, the individual’s
behaviour is the basis of an institution. An attempt was made to understand the context.
Neo-institutionalist thinkers held that institutions are not independent like ‘atoms’ they
are from social conventions.
This political world is not individual. Atoms are associated with stable molecules
and compounds. The preferences of government officials are bound by administrative
structures, legal systems, and abiding beliefs.

5.6 THREE MODELS OF NEW INSTITUTIONALISM

Political science gave us historical institutionalism, economics gave us rational choice

institutionalism, and sociology gave us sociological institutionalism (sec Godin 1996,
2-20; Hall and Taylor 1996, 936). The new institutionalism is little more than a dock
with which Whigs and modernist-empiricists can pursue the kinds of work they long
have done unruffled by the pretensions of behaviouralist and rational choice.
Self-Instructional
Material 85

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
Political Historical
science institutionalis
m

Economic Rational-
choice
institutionalis
Sociology
Sociological
Institutionalism

Fig. 5.1 Origin of three modals

5.6.1 Historical Institutionalism

It is an approach that focuses on how timing, sequence, and path dependence affect
the institution as a whole and also helps in shaping political, and economic behaviour.
On one hand, the historical institutionalism as an approach developed in response
to the group of supporters like pluralists and on the other hand, the structural-
functionalist interpreters. Historical Institutionalism was more impacted by the structural
functionalists. The structural functionalist idea of the polity, as an overall system of
interacting zone is accepted by the structural functionalists.
Nonfictional Institutionalists emphasize on the uneven distribution and operation
of power, impacted by the operation and development of institutions. The Historical
Institutionalists also explain how institutions produce specific paths, i.e., how the
institutions shape or structure a nation’s response to coming up challenges. Nonfictional
institutionalism as an approach is truly attentive to the relation between institutions and
ideas or beliefs.

5.6.2 Rational – Choice Institutionalism

Rational choice institutionalism or RCI is totally a theory-based approach to the study

of institution to maximize their usage and how that institutions affect rational individual
behaviour.
Self-Instructional
86 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

a) The Rational - Choice Institutionalism was primarily inspired by the observation NOTES
of a sensation in the atmosphere of American Congressional conduct, which
could not be explained by the assumptions of conventional rational- choice
academic.
b) Rational - choice Institutionalism employs a characteristic set of behavioural
assumptions likely as, that actors have a fixed set of preferences or tasks.
c) Rational - Choice Institutionalism views politics as a series of combined action
dilemmas.
d) Rational - Choice Institutionalism views actors as a maximizer of their personality-
interest.
e) The Rational - Choice drew fruitful reasonable tools from the ‘new economics
of fellowship’ that emphasize the consequence of property experts, rent seeking
transactional costs.

5.6.3 Sociological Institutionalism

a) It defines institutions are anything that provides ‘frames of meaning’ guiding

natural action is considered an institution. It breaks down the ideal rise between
‘institutions and society’.
b) The authorized structures were seen as the most rational and fruitful, and the
apparent similarity in form of distant institutions is said to be performed by this
need to be rational efficient in working.
c) The sociological institutionalists argue that fellowship continually adopts new
institutional practices, not because corresponding practices are more fruitful in
terms of leading to asked ends, but because like new practice enhances the
acceptance or the legitimacy of the institutions or its participants in the eyes of
the public.
d) The sociological institutionalists have a distinctive understanding of the relations
between institutions and individual’s action.
e) Sociological Institutionalism has a distinctive way of understanding this. The
sociological institutionalists argue that brotherhood constantly adopts new
Self-Instructional
Material 87

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES institutional practices, not because journalist practices are more fruitful in terms
of leading to asked ends, but because corresponding new practice enhances
the acceptance or legitimacy of the associations or its participants in the eyes of
the public.

Outcomes of three models

The challenge before us is not to figure out which one is the most applicable model in
the studies of politics. Despite the relative isolation from each other and lack of scholarly
interchanges, if we give lower importance to the extreme assumptions, we find that
they partake in many common grounds and the insights derived using a model can
round or strengthen the logical carefulness of other models. In this way, literal
institutionalism is extremely important. Numerous of its findings can be easily
paraphrased into rational choice terms, while at the same time some of its other findings
can also speak of social institutionalism. One of the major challenges that are leveled
against the institutionalism and new institutions approach to politics is that it tends to
overemphasize the role of institutions–formal or informal, and give lower importance
to the conflicts and interests that are in numerous ways.
Still, new institutionalism and its three models taken together can give insights
into the functioning of politics in any society.

5.7 OLD AND NEW HISTORICAL

INSTITUTIONALISM: A COMPARISON

“New” institutionalists find a common ground with at least three features of the “old”
institutionalism.
Firstly, both give institutions a central role in political analysis, in “treating political
institutions as determining, ordering, or modifying individual motives, and as acting
autonomously in terms of institutional interests” (March and Olsen 1989 4).
Secondly, both the old and the new institutionalisms partake the given that the
historical development of political institutions values particular attention. As James
Self-Instructional
Bryce put it in his presidential address to the American Political Science Association
88 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

(1909), “political institutions are the top subjects with which our knowledge deals NOTES
(and) every institution must be studied through its growth and its environment.”
Thirdly, both new and old institutionalism assume an unnaturally coercive state
that could be described as an autonomous actor. Woodrow Wilson’s definition of the
state as a “systematized force” whose “essential affection is authority”, which may be
dominated by either an “autonomous minority, or the autonomous majority,” and which
may regulate property “much as it pleases” (1898 572, 623), is nicely close to recent
definitions by scholars who seek to “bring the state back in” to social knowledge.
On the other hand “New” institutionalists find some different ground with following
features of the “old” institutionalism.
First, the focus of Old Institutional Approach was on parliament, executive,
judiciary, etc. and New Institutional Approach takes informal institutions like Trade
Unions, pressure groups etc.
Second, we can see Old Institutional Approach can be explained more as while
New Institutional Approach is purely into theory.
Third, Old Institutional Approach is more static while New Institutional
Approach is more interested in analyzing the dynamic process of institutional change.
Fourth, Old Institutional Approach is based on other human science methods
such as law, history, sociology, etc. whereas the new institutional approach focuses on
the theory of games.

5.8 NEW INSTITUTIONALISM AND THE

DEVELOPING WORLD

The new Institutionalism is also applied in understanding the politics in this developing
world. We have seen that international bodies like World Bank have focused on the
institutions in the developing world while allocating the funds for development purposes.
The major problems in such understanding of institutions were that it ignored the
uncomfortable relationship between externally assisted and designed formal institutions
on the one side and deeply embedded local institutions on the other side.
Self-Instructional
Material 89

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES Development theory has many changes with time in ideology and on international
means, changing conception of government have emerged since World War II and
since then it is represented in terms of growth theory or modernization theory.
We can say that new institutionalism offers insightful examination of how some
institutions function and guide political behaviour in the developing world while others
do so. It could also help us answer questions like why and under what situations
informal norms are powerful in terms of the practices of formal institutions.

5.9 VARIOUS THINKERS

 James March (1928-2018) & Johan Olsen (1939): They may be called as
founders of New Institutionalism. “The New Institutionalism: Organizational
Factors in Political Life” (1984), followed by a book, Rediscovering Institutions:
The Organizational Basis of Politics (1989). Democratic Governance (1995).
They gave ‘Garbage Can model of decision-making theory.
 Douglas C North (1920-2015) (American Economist): Rational Choice
Institutionalism “Institutions are created by utility maximizing individuals with
clear intention”; how institute transaction costs in market economy.
 William Scott (1932) (American sociologist): Relation between organizations
and their institutional environments.
 Paul DiMaggio (1951) and Walter W. Powell (1951): Both American
Sociologists; Cultural or sociological Institutionalism; “belief systems and cultural
frames are imposed on and adapted by individual actors and organizations.
Thus, roles are for a large part determined by larger structures gave the theory
of Institutional isomorphism.

Self-Instructional
90 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

NOTES
5.10 SUMMARY

Institutions are rules, norms, conventions, traditions, practices that structure mortal
organization shape individual behaviour and affect political process and outcomes
Institutionalism is understanding politics from institutional perspectives.
Institutionalism has been the most important approach to comparative politics
since the beginning–Aristotle’s comparison of constitutions of 150 states; Plato’s theory
of the ideal state still, the old legal, formal, normative, descriptive Institutionalism came
nearly dead in the wake of the Behavioural Movement in the 1950s and. 1960s
Institutionalism was a response to Behavioural is to bring back the state and Institutions
back into focus in the1980s. New Institutionalism stick Institutions. Structure of socio
economic superstructure and Individual political actor whose behaviours and actions
are shaped by the institutions in which individuals are involved.
New Institutionalism, in comparison to the ‘Old’, is more logical, explicatory,
and empirical. It is lower ethnocentric, further relative, and contextual.
Understanding politics in a relative perspective is far from easy, but having some
form of theoretical or logical guidance is pivotal to that understanding. The discussion
in this lesson has spent little time on grand theory and concentrated on logical
perspectives that give the investigator with a set of variables that can be used to approach
comparative examination questions.
Comparative politics should be at the center of theory- structure in political
knowledge, but that central position has to some extent been lost through the emphasis
on individual- standing actions. Further, the domination of American political scientists
in the demand place of ideas has tend to produce a somewhat unstable generality of
the connection of comparative research in contemporary political knowledge. It would
continue to argue that the world provides a natural laboratory for understanding political
phenomena. We, as investigators, can’t manipulate the basics in that atmosphere but
we can use the proof available from natural tests to test theory and to make theory.

Self-Instructional
Material 91

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
5.11 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

Essay Type Questions:

1. What do you understand by comparative politics?

2. State and define the three types of new institutionalism.
3. Differentiate between new institutionalism and a developing world.

Multiple-Choice Questions:

1. Whose study is included in the institutional approach of comparative politics?

(a) Legislature
(b) Executive
(c) Judiciary
(d) All of these
2. The proponents of the institutional approach to comparative politics are:
(a) Finer
(b) Aristotle
(c) Bryce
(d) All of these
3. Which concepts are included under neo-institutionalism?
(a) Institutionalism
(b) Pragmatism
(c) Both ‘a’ and ‘b’
(d) None of these
4. Who contributed the most to the development of neo-institutionalism?
(a) Johan P. Olsson
(b) James G. Mark
Self-Instructional
92 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Traditional and Neo-Institutionalism: Historical Institutionalism, ...

(c) Both ‘a’ and ‘b’ NOTES

(d) None of these
5. The concept of neo-institutionalism is related to:
(a) Political Science
(b) Economics
(c) Sociology
(d) All of these
6. Which of the following is not a feature of the comparative method?
(a) It is a scientific method.
(b) It is a search for empirical relationships
(c) It is a narrow and specific technique
(d) It is a method of comparative analysis
7. When did the comparative method become useful in the world?
(a) After the First World War
(b) After the Second World War
(c) After the Cold War
(d) All of the above
8. Which countries’ systems are studied in comparative political systems?
(a) Systems of developed countries
(b) Systems of a developing country
(c) Socialist systems
(d) All of the above
9. In which of the following years did the emphasis on culture become prominent
in comparative politics?
(a) In the 1950s
(b) In the 1960s
(c) In the early 1970s
Self-Instructional
(d) In the late 1970s Material 93

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES 10. What is the study of comparative politics?

(a) Institutions and functions.
(b) All types of political activities, governmental and non-governmental, and
all political organizations.
(c) Political processes.
(d) Techniques and methods of comparative political inquiry.

5.12 REFERENCES

 Blondel, J. (1996) ‘Then and Now: Comparative Politics’, in Political Studies.

Vol. 47 (1), pp. 152-160.
 Pennington, M. (2009) ‘Theory, Institutional and Comparative Politics’, in J.
Bara and M. Pennington (eds.) Comparative Politics: Explaining Democratic
System. Sage Publications, New Delhi, pp. 13-40.
 Hague, R. and M. Harrop and McCormick, J. (2016) Theoretical Approaches
Comparative
 Government and Politics: An Introduction. (Tenth Edition). London: Palgrave
McMillan.
 Hall, P., and Rosemary C.R. Taylor (1996) ‘Political Science and the Three
New Institutionalism’, Political Studies. XLIV, pp. 936-957.

Self-Instructional
94 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Unit IV

Lesson 6 Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative

Politics - Civic Culture, Subculture, Hegemony,
Post Materialism, and Social Capital
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

LESSON 6 NOTES

POLITICAL CULTURE: APPROACHES TO THE

STUDY OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS - CIVIC
CULTURE, SUBCULTURE, HEGEMONY, POST
MATERIALISM, AND SOCIAL CAPITAL
Vaishali Mann
Research Scholar,
Department of Political Science, DU
Structure
6.1 Learning Objectives
6.2 Introduction
6.2.1 Nature and Scope of Comparative Politics
6.2.2 Traditional Comparative Politics
6.2.3 Modern Comparative Politics
6.3 Political Culture Approach
6.3.1 Post Materialism - Ronald Inglehart
6.3.2 Subculture – Dennis Kavanagh
6.3.3 Hegemony by Antonio Gramsci
6.4 Social Capital–Putman
6.5 Summary
6.6 Self - Assessment Questions
6.7 References

6.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this lesson, the students will be able to understand:

 Political culture and its approaches.
 Ronald Inglehart’s Post Materialism
 Subculture ofDennis Kavanagh
 Hegemony by Antonio Gramsci
Self-Instructional
 Social Capital of Putman. Material 97

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
6.2 INTRODUCTION

6.2.1 Nature and Scope of Comparative Politics

Comparative politics means comparing the political systems of different kinds.

Comparative politics is regarded to be a discipline as old as political theory. Aristotle
is widely held to be the father of comparative politics because he was the first political
thinker to conduct a comparative study of 158 constitutions of the world. He provided
an elaborate classification of constitutions.
The nature and the scope of comparative can be divided into two phases:
i. Up to World War 1– Traditional Comparative Politics
ii. Up to World War 2 – Modern Comparative Politics

6.2.2 Traditional Comparative Politics

Traditional comparative politics is generally regarded to be very narrow in scope. It

included just the study of the constitutions of the western world. The reason behind
this one was that the countries that were colonies had no political systems of their own.
Since all the western countries were at similar levels of development, their societies,
way of life, culture did not differ much from one another. So, the basis of comparison
was very narrow and limited. The maximum comparison could only be made on forms
of government.
Self-Instructional
98 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

Hence, the traditional comparative politics only focused upon the study of NOTES
government rather than the study of politics. Since the study of constitution and forms
of government was the focus area of traditional comparative politics, the method that
was used was LEGAL CONSTITUTIONAL method.
However, the traditional method suffered from certain limitations like it was
narrow in scope because it excluded the study of political systems of the non-western
countries. It was static as it focused upon the study of constitutions only, not the study
of politics. It was also essentially non comparative as the only point of comparison
was the constitution. Hence it was called ETHNO-CENTRIC and PAROCHIAL.

6.2.3 Modern Comparative Politics

It began after the Second World War. The main reason for development of this was
the process of decolonization and the emergence of third world countries. This now
became a widely accepted view that there was a lot of difference between theory and
practice, text and context. Hence, it was realized that it is not sufficient if we just go for
the study of constitution. It was equally important to understand the socio-cultural
factors in these societies.
Also, the need for study of developing areas coincided with behavioural
movements which made the study of modern comparative politics possible. The need
to study new areas itself motivated scholars to make innovations for new approaches.
There are different types of modern comparative methods such as:
 Systems Approach
 Structural Functional Approach
 Political Development Approach
 Political Modernization Approach
 Political Culture Approach
 Political Sociology Approach
 Political Economy Approach

Self-Instructional
Material 99

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES But through this lesson, we plan to focus on one approach among them, i.e. the
POLITICAL CULTURE APPROACH.

6.3 POLITICAL CULTURE APPROACH

First let us understand what is meant by political culture. Political culture refers to a set
of norms, values, and political orientation of people. Political culture is a subset of
culture. It denotes people’s norms, values, orientations with respect to the political
systems.
Different thinkers have described political culture in different ways:
 According to Pye, Political culture describes the overall pattern in society
of beliefs, attitudes and values towards the political system, or ‘the
sum of the fundamental values, sentiments and knowledge that give form to
political science.
 The Civic Culture’ is the classic 1963 study by Gabriel Almond and Sidney
Verba. Their investigation is called the first systematic study of political culture
approach.
 Daniel J. Elzar talks of three dimensions of political culture based on the
involvement of people in the public sphere - individualistic, moralistic, and
traditionalist. Political culture is not only a national or a local phenomenon
but can also be understood at the global level.
 A key example of global-scale analysis is offered by Samuel Huntington
in his ‘The Clash of Civilizations’. Huntington saw seven or eight of them
in all: Western, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic–Orthodox, Latin American,
Chinese, and (possibly) African.

6.3.1 Post Materialism – Ronald Inglehart

Now let us look into the approach within political culture provided by political thinker
Ronald Inglehart. Let us analyze it.
Self-Instructional
100 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

Ronal Inglehart was an American political scientist who specialized into the field NOTES
of comparative politics. His core theory about political culture was that political culture
always dictates political systems. He tried to establish a correlation between
Protestantism and western democratization.
If we first look at the term POST MODERNISM, we need to understand its
meaning first. The term post modernism was popularized by Ronald Inglehart. It basically
means a change in individual values. This change basically happens when there is a
change in materialist, economic, and physical outlook to a whole different set of
individualistic values based upon autonomy and self-expression. He carried out this
study in his book The Silent Revolution and analysis was based upon the changes in
western societies. He stated in his work that as western societies progressed and
became prosper, the post materialist values gradually increased in these societies. This
is what he termed as intergenerational replacement. This change to welcome and
embrace new post materialist values was visible in the younger generation.
According to him, for this change to happen that is, the change from materialist
to post materialist values, it is very crucial that the material needs of the human beings
are satisfied first, because when these needs are satisfied then only a person is willing
to move towards the post materialist values like peace, prosperity, growth and self-
esteem.
In order to make his point clearer he used two models–
i. Scarcity hypothesis
ii. Socialization hypothesis
 The Scarcity Hypothesis: Ronald Inglehart assumed that individuals pursue
certain goals in life but in a hierarchical order. This means that first individuals
pursue materialist goals in life and only when these goals are fulfilled then an
individual moves from materialist to post materialist goals in life. When people
inspire for freedom and autonomy, they try to satisfy their basic needs first.
They try to fulfill their needs like hunger, thirst, physical security. These
materialistic goals always have a priority over post materialistic goals. It is
only when materialistic goals are satisfied then post materialistic goals
like belonging, esteem, and aesthetic and intellectual satisfaction come into
the picture. When material goals are fulfilled, it is then the focus is shifted
Self-Instructional
towards other goals. Material 101

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES  The Socialization Hypothesis: Ronald claims that this relationship between
material conditions and values is not an immediate relationship. Many surveys
have indicated that this shift usually takes place when one reaches adulthood.
People who have suffered economic scarcity will continue to place material
needs at a higher level whereas people who are materialistically affluent or
prosperous will start moving from these materialist needs towards values
like individual improvement, empowerment, personal freedom, humanism,
emphasis on sustainability.
These two hypotheses given by Ronald suggest us that when people experience
long periods of materialist affluence, only then they are willing to move in the direction
of post materialist values. According to Inhasart, these hypotheses together reflect that
prosperity and the absence of war that has prevailed in the western countries, the
young people place less emphasis on values like economic security and physical security
as compared to the older generation who have faced the periods of economic distress
and insecurity and thereby place greater value on the concept like security. The young
population seeks to embrace nonmaterial needs or values like quality of one’s life,
freedom, etc.
Ronald Inglehart was heavily influenced by another American psychologist
ABRAHAM MASLOW, while formulating his hypothesis. In 1973, Maslow wrote a
book titled ‘A theory of human motivation’. In this book, he proposed an idea that
humans have a hierarchy of needs. He depicted this in the form of a pyramid. At the
bottom were the most basic psychological needs like food, water. On the next level
were needs like safety, security, stability, health, and employment. The level in the
pyramid keeps on increasing till it reaches the last level where goals or needs like self-
actualization, freedom, creativity, and morality emerge.
Inglehart through his concept of post materialism supported Maslow’s hierarchy
of needs. Till the time scarcity existed in people’s lives, needs like health, employment,
security would always take precedence over needs like freedom and creativity. As
soon as scarcity disappeared or we can also say that as soon as the most basic needs
of humans were fulfilled, individuals would start shifting their needs to non-materials
values like creativity, freedom and self-actualization.

Self-Instructional
102 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

Materialism versus Post Materialism NOTES

If we look at the entire world from the perspective of materialism, money/wealth is

regarded to be a positive value and is associated with high social status and happiness.
These materialist values often tend to ignore other people’s happiness and also place
less importance on one’s own spiritual growth. Many studies that have been conducted
before show that people who give more importance to materialist values tend to have
lower levels of physical and mental health. However, this is not the case with post
materialism. Ronald Inglehart in his recently conducted research stated that at the end
of 20th century, younger generations in the global north are now moving towards post
materialist values. According to him, post materialism has also led to an increase in
political activism, radicalism, and now politics is being seen from an ideological
perspective rather than just material perspective.

6.3.2 Subculture – Dennis Kavanagh

Now let us look at another dimension to understanding political culture provided by

another thinker Dennis Kavanagh. Dennis Kavanagh is a British political analyst who
has written extensively on post war British politics. Dennis Kavanagh defines a political
culture as a set of values, beliefs and attitudes within which a political system operates.
His biggest contribution to the field of political science has been the concept of
subculture. Some of the scholarly works on political culture suggested that this very
assumption that there exists only a single type of political culture across a nation was a
complete myth. It was a huge possibility that many political cultures co-existed together
within any given political systems, rather than a single national political culture. To
clearly understand the relationship between political culture and political system, it
was very crucial to first understand the interactions that took place between different
subcultures and the impact of this interaction on the political system as a whole. The
term subculture here becomes very important. Let us first understand, what it means.
The term subculture refers to the distinctive identity of diverse social groups and
communities in any given society at a particular time. In the context of political culture,
it refers to the existence of different types of behaviours, opinions, orientations, and
attitudes possessed by different communities and social groups towards a particular
political system.
Self-Instructional
Material 103

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES Dennis Kavanagh in his very popular work ‘political culture’ has identified four
bases on which subcultures develop:
i. Elite versus Mass Subculture
ii. Cultural Division within Elites
iii. Generational Subcultures
iv. Social Structure
These four bases provide us with different sets of subcultures in a society that
have different social and political implications. Each of these ways of thinking about
the different subcultures divisions introduces us to new forms of investigations. Now
let us look at them in detail:

Elite versus Mass Culture

The elite versus mass culture tend to reflect us the differences especially the attitudinal
differences that exist between political or the elite class and the remainder population.
The separation of the elite and the masses is useful. A number of classic studies argue
that the elites tend to be well versed in self recruitment, socializing the political elites in
a manner that they develop a certain attitudinal patterns. For example: American political
elites tend to develop a consensus upon unspoken norm and rules.

Cultural Divisions within Elites

This model focuses upon the differences that exist between different elites within the
same or different political cultures. This emphasis on elites is based upon the idea that
the important venue of politics is the zone populated by elites. The nature of elite
behaviour is differently functioning in the democratic politics.

Generational Model

This model is based upon political dynamism. The argument here is that distinct political
cultures belong to different generations. Political culture changes over time as particular
generations become socialized into distinct value sets, reach political maturity in
possession of those value sets and eventually die out to be replaced by a new generational
political culture. The agenda in a political system keeps on changing in accordance
Self-Instructional
104 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

with the priorities derived from underlying values and the political parties and political NOTES
institutions have to adapt to them accordingly.
This model can be linked to the post modernism model provided by Ronald
Inglehart who stated that the underlying values tend to experience generational shift in
western societies, especially in the 1970’s.

6.3.3 Hegemony by Antonio Gramsci

On the basis of the concept of ideology, many Marxists and neo-Marxist thinkers
have thought differently on the way politics works. Marx and Engels regarded the
dominant ideas of any historical epoch as the ideas that have been declared legitimate.
It is believed that all political and cultural ideas are rooted in the prevailing power
relationship. Gramsci developed the notion of hegemony to make his readers understand
how actually power relations operate in capitalist societies.
But first let us understand who is Antonio Gramsci. Antonio Gramsci was an
Italian Marxist intellectual and politician. He is credited with refining Marxist thought.
He was a very vocal critique of fascist leader Benito Mussolini. He was imprisoned in
1926 where he remained until his death in 1937.
His work is titled ‘prison notebooks’ and is regarded to be one of the finest and
most important contributions to political theory. This work covers wide range of topics
like religion, fascism, Italian history, nationalism, civil society, popular culture, etc.
Gramsci is best known for his theory of cultural hegemony. This theory basically tends
to describe how the elite class, also called Bourgeoisie class use cultural institutions
and symbols to maintain power in the capitalist societies. According to Gramsci, the
Bourgeoisie class develops a hegemonic culture using a tool called IDEOLOGY. Instead
of using violence, economic coercion, and force to maintain their dominance, they use
ideology as their most potent tool. They create an illusion of certain values which are
of their own interest. This illusion slowly seems like a COMMOM SENSE prevailing
among the masses. And this is the process by which the entire status quo is maintained.
Thus, according to Gramsci, the concept of cultural hegemony is used to maintain the
consent to the capitalist order. This cultural hegemony is produced and reproduced by
the dominant class through the institutions that form the superstructure that is the religious,
social and political institutions.
Self-Instructional
Material 105

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES Gramsci’s contribution is regarded to be one of the major contributions to

Marxist thought. He critically examined Marx’s explanation of history. He looked for
many other explanations of history and he got really impressed by another Italian
scholar BENEDETTO CROCE. Croce has emphasized the role of cultural factors in
history. He stood apart from other Marxist thinkers. The reason being his rejection of
economic determinism of Marx and Engels. Economic determinism means that economic
relationships are the only foundation upon which all the other societal and political
arrangements in society are based. This theory claims that all the societies in the world
are divided into different economic classes whose relative political power is determined
by the nature of the political system.
Gramsci had felt that maybe Marx has ignored the role of cultural factors in
history.

Gramsci’s Contribution to Marxist Theory of History

Marx theory of history has been criticized as CRUDE ECONOMIC DTERMINISM.

This means it was not refined or updated. Because of Gramsci’s contribution, his
theory is no longer economic determinism.
Let us understand Gramsci’s contribution by comparing it to Marx model.
Marx model of society consisted of two structures:
i. Base
ii. Superstructure
Base is the economic structure and state; media and educational institutions are
part of superstructures. For Marx, superstructure is not a structure in itself but a reflection
of the base. It means that if economic structure changes, super structure will change
automatically. It means only one revolution is required- change in basic structure or the
mode of the production.
Gramsci presented a different point of view here. For Gramsci, it is not enough
to fight at the level of economic structure. We must fight at two levels- basic structure
and super structure. It is more challenging to change the superstructure. Basic structure
can change in a day, but superstructure may take centuries because change in culture,
values, beliefs take a lot of time. Like all Marxists, Gramsci also considers economic
Self-Instructional structure as the basic structure i.e., the ultimate determinant is economic structure.
106 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

However, unlike Marx, Gramsci suggests that superstructure is also a structure. He NOTES
has divided the superstructure in two layers-
i. Civil society
ii. State
Together both civil society and the state forms INTERGRAL STATE.
PURPOSE OF THE STATE is to act as an instrument of capitalism. It helps in
perpetuation or continuation of rule of capitalist class. According to Gramsci, the state
represents the coercive force used against those who want to challenge capitalism.
PURPOSE OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY is also to perpetuate the domination of
capitalist class. It is much closer to the base and acts as the first layer of protection. It
acts as cushion or shock absorber. If the state uses coercion, civil society uses the
power of attraction. Civil society according to Gramsci, works to create attraction for
bourgeoisie way of life or values. Gramsci uses the term HEGEMONY for this POWER
OF ATTRACTION.

Understanding Hegemony

Hegemony in the literal sense means leadership. Leaders also use force. They also
compel others to work according to their will. However, leaders also rely upon the
power of attraction to generate consent. Thus, hegemony represents SOFT POWER
as opposed to military power/force called HARD POWER. The difference between
both is that if hard power is exercised on the body, soft power is exercised on mind. If
hard power is concrete, soft power is invisible. If hard power is based on coercion,
soft power is based on consent.
Thus, capitalism continues because of its ability to generate consent in its favor.
That idea becomes a hegemonic idea which is regarded to be as common sense by all.
It ends up becoming a way of life. Gramsci says that the major force behind generation
of consent is the intellectuals.

Role of Intellectuals

Gramsci has given a very different interpretation of intellectuals. In every society,

intellectuals receive the greatest amount of respect. They are seen as those who could
tell the truth. In the general sense, people who are acknowledged and have done Self-Instructional
Material 107

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES accomplishments in the field of art, literature, science, religion, and other disciplines. It
is also assumed that intellectuals are NEUTRAL people engaged in understanding the
truth.
According to Gramsci- “Every person is an intellectual, but every person does
not perform the role of intellectual.” Every person is intellectual because every person
performs some work. Every work requires manual as well as intellectual labor. But not
every work is recognized as intellectual work. According to Gramsci, only that work
is recognized as intellectual work that has unique importance in the system of production.
The main role of intellectuals is maintenance of a particular system by generating such
values, lifestyle that help in perpetuation of the system.
Gramsci classifies intellectuals into two types:
i. Organic intellectuals
ii. Traditional intellectual
 Organic Intellectuals: When a new dominant class emerges, it brings into
existence a class of intellectuals who will play the role of maintaining the
system. For example: When the capitalist class emerges, it also brings into
existence a class of intellectuals like engineers, bankers, managers,
supervisors, and civil servants who play a role in maintaining the system.
They are called organic because they are organically linked with the dominant
class i.e., their wellbeing is dependent on the dominant class. According to
Gramsci, their major role is the creation of the CULUTRE OF
CAPITALISM. They help in maintaining the hegemony of the dominant
class. They are also called DEPUTEES of the dominant class.
 Traditional Intellectuals: These include those persons who have been
recognized as intellectuals before the emergence of new dominant class.
For example: In western societies, church fathers were traditional intellectuals.
Since they are not organically originated with the new dominant class, they
appear autonomous.
Gramsci here suggests a very interesting point. He says that the working class
should try to establish nexus with the intellectual class. There is NO REVOLUTION
WITOUT INTELLECTUALS. So far, workers have produced intellectuals like
Self-Instructional
technicians and supervisors. Now these workers should work for their own class.
108 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

They should provide leadership to the working class. Supervisors and technicians can NOTES
act as organic intellectuals for working classes.
We need to understand that the political and practical implications of Gramsci’s
ideas were far reaching because he warned of the limited possibilities of direct
revolutionary struggle for control of the means of production. Gramsci’s ideas have
influenced popular education practices and research methods as well. The idea of
hegemony has also influenced debates about civil society.

6.4 SOCIAL CAPITAL – PUTMAN

Social capital by Putman is one of the most important contributions given by him in
comparative politics. Let us understand what this concept is. The term social capital
was originally coined byAmerican theorist Judson Hanifan. Social capital can be defined
as the networks of relationships among people who live and work in a particular
society, enabling that society to function effectively. It basically includes effective
functioning of various social groups through interpersonal relationships, a shared sense
of identity, understanding, norms, values, trust, and cooperation. It includes both the
tangible and non-tangible resources including public spaces, private property, actors,
human capital, etc.
Putman’s concept of social capital has three components:
i. Moral obligations and norms
ii. Social values
iii. Social networks
Putman’s main idea is that if a region has a well-functioning economic system
and a high level of political integration, these are the direct result of successful
accumulation of social capital. In the United States, many social problems have been
caused due to decline of social capital. He talks about his concept of social capital in
his book ‘bowling alone’. It is in this book Putman has laid down a convincing case
that community involvement had declined very much in American societies since 1960’s.
To Putman, the theory of social capital is that “social networks have value” and
Self-Instructional
the externalities produced from these factors have implications for the wider community. Material 109

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES The dense networks which exist among people – within their families or organizations
or even within their religion contribute to positive forms of behaviour. These interpersonal
connections allow people to trust each other and also help in the creation of healthy
community bonds. People this way can work together in pursuing shared goals. That
is there always an important element of RECIPROCATION.
Now Putman does not stop here. He further elaborates the differences between
kinds of social capital like – bonding social capital and bridging social capital. The
former one means the elements which create links between those who share something
in common and the latter means that the elements which create link between quite
different things. Putman says that it is the second one i.e., bridging social capital that
becomes the most important factor in connecting people in a diverse society.
In his book ‘BOWLING ALONE’ Putman has given certain examples on how
Americans have deviated from social engagement. There has been a reduction in average
member rate in associations. The average Americans attending the club meetings have
also declined drastically. Membership in church related groups also declined in 1960’s.
Going out to see friends have become less common, socialization in the American
societies has reduced drastically. Fewer families were eating together now. Participation
in league bowling had also fallen very sharply. So according to Putman, people were
still bowling but now they were bowling alone. On a larger level, this means that
people were still conducting their basic activities but now were participating in those
activities alone as social participation had suffered a setback in the American societies.
Putman work has been largely hailed in American society as one of the finest
contributions in the study of political culture. His insights on social capital have very
broad implications. In European countries too, a similar decline in civic participation
has taken place. There has been a decrease in the number of people who read
newspapers, and who participate in political parties. If we try to understand the criticism
that Putman has faced, it is not clear whether active participation has made positive
contribution in civic regions.

Self-Instructional
110 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Political Culture: Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics - ...

NOTES
6.5 SUMMARY

The lesson summarized the importance of political culture in a political system. It has
discussed about the meaning and definition of subculture and about the idea of base
and super structure given by Gramsci Putnam and Dennis Kavanagh.

6.6 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1. What do you understand by subculture? Write an essay on Dennis Kavanagh’s

concept on subculture.
2. Illustrate on Gramsci’s Contribution to Marxist Theory of History and political
culture.

6.7 REFERENCES

 Johari J.C, Comparative Politics, sterling publishers Pvt. Ltd. 1892(1972)

 Mercator net: navigating modern complexities, article title- Robert Putman insights
on social capital. (2022)
 Article title- Introducing the civic perspective on social capital.
 Power cube: article title- Gramsci and Hegemony
 Article title- Five alternative approaches to comparative politics.
 Article title- Note on civic culture
 Vitte de Hnas, Article title- Post Materialism: ideological orientation and values.
(2004)

Self-Instructional
Material 111

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Unit V

Lesson 7 Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics:

Political Economy - Underdevelopment, Dependency,
Modernization, and World System Theory
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

LESSON 7 NOTES

APPROACHES TO STUDYING COMPARATIVE

POLITICS: POLITICAL ECONOMY -
UNDERDEVELOPMENT, DEPENDENCY,
MODERNIZATION, AND WORLD SYSTEM THEORY
Dr. Garima Sharma
Research Scholar,
Department of Political Science, DU
Structure
7.1 Learning Objectives
7.2 Introduction
7.3 Historical Overview of Political Economy
7.4 Modernization Theory of Development
7.5 Dependency
7.6 Underdevelopment
7.7 World System Theory
7.8 Summary
7.9 Self - Assessment Questions
7.10 References

7.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completing this lesson, the students will be able to understand:

 The Political Economy Approach.
 The relations between politics and the economy.
 Modernization theory of development.
 Reason behind the rise of dependency theory.

Self-Instructional
Material 115

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES
7.2 INTRODUCTION

The era between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries is a period of an economic
shift in the western world when the market started to supersede all aspects of societies.
The Clutches of the church began to shatter after the beginning of liberalism in academia
and the arrival of the scientific revolution with notables like Galileo, Newton, and
Voltaire seeking to subject all aspects of human existence under the scrutiny of reason.
Although the markets were still in their initial developing stage and due to this, the
responsibilities of societies also shifted from church to state. The Political Economy
approach in Comparative study is an approach to studying the relationship between
institution and market.

7.3 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL

ECONOMY

The Historical Lineage of political economy could be seen from the early fourteenth
century to the late seventeenth century in the western world. From then to now these
historical transformations in the political economy approach could be categorized into
four phases that are as shown below:
 Classical Liberal Economy
This phase of the political economy approach could be seen between the 17th to mid-
18th centuries. In this phase liberal scholars like Adam Smith (1723-1790), Thomas
Malthus (1766-1834), David Ricardo (1772-1823), Nassau Senior (1790-1864),
and Jean Baptiste Say (1767-1832) put emphasis on the potential of the market.
Classical political economists were famous for their combination of optimism and
pessimism toward the market. For example, the stalwart of political economy, Adam
Smith in his classical work The Wealth of Nations (1776) presented the commitment
towards laissez-faire or free market by the idea of the ‘invisible hand’, where he
advocated the idea of individual freedom and the other hand, he suggested that the
market could not work its magic forever. Similarly, Thomas Malthus and David Ricardo
Self-Instructional
116 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

emphasize the role of the market over the state and church and were also skeptical NOTES
towards the distribution of resources.
 Radical Marxist Economy
In response to classical political economy, there was an emergence of a radical
perspective in the history of political economy. The main shift from a classical liberal
economy to a radical perspective is that they literally wanted to adopt the values of
enlightenment. Although classical political economists tried to challenge the power of
the state still there was a lack of critical thinking. Radicals demanded that every aspect
of society should be subjected to criticism to check the test of reason. Early radical
thinkers include William Godwin (1756-1836), Thomas Paine (1737-1809), Marquis
de Condorcet (1743-1794), Robert Owen (1771-1858), Charles Fourier (1772-
1837), and Henri de Saint-Simon (1760-1825). These thinkers started the journey of
radical perspective in the history of political economy by criticizing the view of private
property. The popularity of radical thinking has increased with Karl Marx, who is also
known as a proponent of Marxist ideology. This German philosopher took his ideas
on capitalism from the German philosopher G.W.F Hegel. Marx presents capitalism
as a necessary evil for the establishment of a new and better organization of society.
After the death of Marx, many thinkers were inspired by his philosophy, which includes
thinkers like Georgi Plekhanov (1854-1938), Karl Kautsky (1854-1938), and V. L.
Lenin (1870-1940). However, later, many radical thinkers shifted from Marxian
philosophy to socialism. These new thinkers’ emphasis on the evolutionary transition
from capitalism to socialism through the democratic political process.
 Neo Classical Economics
All the previous dominant perspectives are seemingly flawed and create an ideological
vacuum. To fill this vacuum, a new perspective started to emerge in the history of
political economic studies. This shift in political economy always goes to three theorists;
Carl Menger (1840-1921), W. Stanley Jevons (1835-1882), and Leon Walras. They
emphasize the focus of political economy on the behaviour of individual consumers
and competitive markets. Although Neo classical economists also divided into trends.
The first one was those who opposed any intervention of government and on second
trend supporters were those who emphasized on the positive role of the government.
After some time, the supporter of government become more famous with the work of
Self-Instructional
Material 117

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES Cambridge economist John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946). He claims that laissez-
faire capitalism is inherently prone to depression and unemployment, so there is a dire
need for active government policies to stimulate the market.

7.4 MODERNIZATION THEORY OF DEVELOPMENT

The modernization theory of development presents the process of transformation of

traditional societies into modern societies. Modernization theory was starting to be
dominant in social sciences after the Second World War and in 1991, the end of the
cold war with the declaration of Francis Fukuyama once again situated this theory in
the dominant position. According to modernization theory, traditional societies would
be developed as they adopt modern practices. For example, Coleman presents the
three main features of modern societies: a) Differentiation of political structure, b)
Secularization of political culture – with the ethos of equality, and c) enhances the
capacity of a society’s political system.
The work of Max Weber and Talcott Parson has had a significant influence on
modernization theory where Max Weber describes modernization theory in terms of
the transformation of traditional, rural, and agrarian societies into a secular, urban, and
industrial society. Similarly, Walt Rostow is considered as the most influential thinker in
the formalization of the modernization theory. In his book, The Stages of Economic
growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (1960), he described the concept of ‘Stages
of development’. He presented the different phases of societies to reach at the final
stage of modernization. According to Rostow, each society can be classified into five
stages of growth as follows:
1. Traditional Societies
This stage is described as a subsistent, agriculture-based economy with intensive labor
and population without any scientific temperament. According to Rostow “A traditional
society is one whose structure is developed within limited production functions, based
on pre-Newtonian science and technology, and pre-Newtonian attitudes towards the
physical world. These societies primarily rely on agriculture due to the technological

Self-Instructional
118 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

and infrastructural constraints, and their value system is dominated by “long run fatalism”, NOTES
in which one has a very limited range of occupational options.” Rostow considered
Chinese dynasties, Middle Eastern Civilization, and medieval Europe under this
traditional society category.
2. Pre-condition to takeoff
The second stage of development is also known as the transitional stage, where these
pre-Newtonian societies moved from agriculture to manufacturing. The Second stage
of growth encompasses societies in transition: this is the time when preconditions for
take-off are developed; for it takes time to transform a traditional society in the ways
necessary for it to exploit the fruits of modern science in order to avoid diminishing
returns, and thus enjoy the blessings and choices opened up by compound interest’s
march” (Rostow 1959).
3. Take-off
It is the take-off stage that marks a short period of intensive growth. “During the take-
off, new industries expand rapidly, yielding profits, a large portion of which is reinvested
in the new plant; and these new industries, in turn, stimulate further expansion in the
urban areas and in the other modern industrial plant, through their rapidly expanding
requirements for factory workers, support services and other manufactured goods.”
The entire process of modern sector expansion results in an increase in income for
those who not only save at high rates but also put their savings at the disposal of those
working in the modern sector. The new class of entrepreneurs grows, and it directs the
growing flow of private-sector investment. The economy makes use of previously
untapped natural resources and production methods” (Rostow 1959).
4. Drive to maturity
According to Rostow, reaching this stage takes place over a long period of time. At
this stage, we can observe the rise in standards of living, the use of technology increase,
and the overall growth of the national economy. “Formally we can define maturity as
the stage in which an economy demonstrates the capacity to move beyond the industries
that powered its take-off and to absorb and apply efficiently across a wide range of its
resources – if not the entire range- the most advanced fruits of modern technology”
(Rostow 1959).

Self-Instructional
Material 119

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES 5. Age of high mass consumption

This is the last stage of development according to Rostow. Countries like the United
States are able to reach this stage. After reaching this stage societies are shifting towards
stable economic growth and governance. At this stage, economic growth also leads
toward social welfare and security. The emergence of the welfare state can be located
at this stage.
According to Rostow, the process of change is simpler and self-sustaining.
Economic growth could be achieved by following a five-stage model of growth. He
suggested that “all societies can be placed in one of five categories or stages of economic
growth”.
In 1958 one more thinker, Daniel Lerner presents the idea of modernization
through his major work ‘The Passing of Traditional Societies’. Lerner’s premise of
modernization was based on the degree of literacy, Urbanization, Media participation,
etc. In summary, we can conclude that modernization is a high degree of structural
differentiation and specialization. This could be reflected in various ways like the mode
of production, rationalization of society, and the role of citizens in various activities of
democracy. “The Traditional society is variously understood as having a predominance
of ascriptive, particularistic, diffuse, and affective patterns of action, an extended kinship
structure with a multiplicity of functions, little spatial and social mobility, a deferential
stratification system, mostly primary economic activities, a tendency toward autarchy
of social units, an undifferentiated political structure, with traditional elitist and
hierarchical sources of authority, etc. By contrast, modern society is characterized by
a predominance of achievement; universalistic, specific, and neutral orientations and
patterns of action; a nuclear family structure serving limited functions; a complex and
highly differentiated occupational system; high rates of spatial and social mobility; a
predominance of change and self-sustained growth; highly differentiated political
structure with rational-legal sources of authority and so on”. Although the theory of
development from the lens of modernization is not welcomed all over the world by
many thinkers from developing countries.

Criticism of Modernization Theory

 This theory was created with the intention of justifying the position of western
Self-Instructional capitalist countries.
120 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

 Modernization theory was trying to establish the superiority of the western world. NOTES
 Dependency theory criticizes it for exploiting the resources of underdeveloped
countries.
 This theory ignores the effect of external factors on a state’s underdevelopment
position.
 Modernization theory was seen as a danger to the indigenous culture of a society.

7.5 DEPENDENCY

As modernization school explained development from the perspective of the western

world, similarly dependency school is about presenting the view of development from
a third-world perspective. Dependency schools first arose in Latin America and later
on it moved towards North America. Andre Gunder Frank, who happened to be in
Latin America in the early 1960s was instrumental in establishing the idea of the
dependency school in the western world. If we analyze the reason for the emergence
of the dependency school, then it could be concluded by three reasons. First could be
seen as a response to the failure of the ECLA program, the second was the crisis of
orthodox Marxism, and last, the decline of the modernization school in the United
States.
The ECLA (UN- Economic Commission for Latin America)
The ECLA program was initially set up in Latin America under the headship of Prebisch
(1960) with the hope of establishing industrialization. According to Prebisch, the main
reason for Latin America’s underdevelopment is due to the one-sided international
division of labor. Under this scheme, Latin America had to produce food and raw
materials for the great industrial centers and in return, Latin America received industrial
goods from these industrial countries. For the sake of the development of Latin America,
Prebisch emphasizes stopping this one-sided international division of labor and urges
for industrialization. In reality, this ECLA program did not succeed and led to economic
stagnation and political problems in Latin America.

Self-Instructional
Material 121

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES Neo-Marxism
In this era, the old orthodox Marxist ideology was shifted towards neo-Marxism in
Latin America with the success of the Chinese and Cuban revolutions. This ideology
of Neo-Marxism has provided the base for the dependency school by criticizing both,
the ECLA program and the modernization school. Neo-Marxist see imperialism from
the perspective of Third world development. They have described the need for socialist
revolution in these third-world countries, according to their contextual needs.
Criticism of the Modernization School
In the 1960s, many thinkers started criticizing the basic premises of the modernization
theory. According to Frank, the modernization theory of development provides the
‘internal explanation’ for the backwardness of third-world countries. Modernization
thinkers believe that traditional culture, overpopulation, little investment, and lack of
achievement motivation were the reasons for the stagnant societies of the third-world
countries. To counter this explanation, Frank provides an external explanation from
the side of third-world countries. According to him, “It is wrong to characterize third
world countries as primitive, feudal, and traditional. Because many countries such as
China and India were quite advanced before they encountered colonialism in the
eighteenth century”. In other words, “the development of underdevelopment” is not a
natural condition but an artifact created by the long history of colonial domination in
third-world countries.
The Dependency School
There were many thinkers, who have worked on this school of thought ‘dependency’.
These thinkers try to expose the basic premises of modernization theory, which worked
under the structure of imperialism. Dos Santos is the most prominent thinker who
explained the whole structure of dependency worldwide. He argued that all countries
are interconnected but in a different manner. In other words, the world is divided into
two parts; dominant and dependent and the relationship between dominant and
dependent countries is unequal because the development of the former takes place at
the expense of the latter. A Brazilian economist Dos Santos has the most notable
contribution in the field of political economy for his formulation of the concept of
dependency. He has coined the concept of ‘New Dependency’. His theory of
dependency become famous during the 1960s when many Latin- American countries
Self-Instructional
122 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

were struggling for economic stability. Dos Santos tries to explain this dependence by NOTES
distinguishing it into three historical forms: Colonial Dependence, Financial-Industrial
Dependence and Technological-Industrial Dependence.
 Colonial Dependence: The first historical form of dependency could be seen
through the relations between colonies and colonizers. Colonizers always try to
drain all resources of the colonies in the name of modernization and
westernization. In Dos Santos’s words, ‘The commercial and financial capital
of the dominant country, in alliance with the colonial state, monopolized the
control of Land, mines and Human Resources and the export of gold, silver and
tropical products of the country.’
 Financial-Industrial Dependence: After the end of colonization, the shift of
dependence of third-world countries moved towards financial-industrial
dependence. The economies of dependent countries were centered upon the
export of raw materials and agricultural products for consumption in European
countries.
 Technological-Industrial Dependence: According to Dos Santos, the third
historical form of dependence could be seen in the form of technological-industrial
dependence. In this form developing countries have to depend on developed
countries for their technological advancement. This form emerged after the World
War II era, when industrial development began to take place in many
undeveloped countries.
Dos Santos concludes that ‘the economic backwardness of underdeveloped
countries is not due to a lack of integration with capitalism. Those studies that support
this conclusion are nothing more than ‘ideology disguised as science’. Instead, this
underdeveloped is due to the monopolistic control of developed countries over foreign
capital, finance, and technology.
Basic Premises of the Dependency School
 The aim of the dependency school is to present the general pattern of dependency
in the third world throughout the history of capitalism from the sixteenth century
to the present.
 Dependency schools try to explain the underdevelopment from the vantage
point of external factors. Modernization theory claims that internal factors of Self-Instructional
Material 123

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES society like unemployment, poverty, and illiteracy are the reasons for the
underdevelopment, whereas dependency school argues that it’s the external
dependency factor of the third world that makes them an underdeveloped section
of the world.
 Dependency schools try to explain the lack of development through an economic
perspective.
 Dependency theory is seen as incompatible with development, as the
development of one section is always at the cost of exploitation of the other
section of the world.

7.6 UNDERDEVELOPMENT

Development is a process that indicates overall progressive changes in all spheres of

society. Mostly the theories were propounded by political economists and evolutionary
sociologists in the context of the western world. After the Second World War, the
notion of development become famous in the context of underdeveloped countries,
but soon it was realized that the prevalent concepts related to development were still
not proving successful in solving the problem like poverty alleviation in developing
countries. With this result from development theories, the theory of underdevelopment
was propounded from the theoretical debate between Marxism and the experiences
of development in Latin America.
In his book “Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America”, the famous
political scientist Andre Gunder Frank explains that development and underdevelopment
are the results of internal contradictions in the world capitalist system. He was influenced
by the work of Paul Baran’s ‘The political economy of growth’ (1957), where he
described the relationship between Western Europe and the other part of the world
based on conflict and exploitation. Although economic development and
underdevelopment can be seen differently both are relative to each other in nature.
One side’s development always leads to the underdevelopment of the other section of
the world, but that doesn’t mean that development is the opposite of underdevelopment.
In other words, Frank argues that “before there was any development there was no
Self-Instructional underdevelopment. Development and underdevelopment are related through the
124 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

common historical process both have shared during the past several centuries and the NOTES
mutual or reciprocal influences that they have had, still have, and will continue to have
on each other through history.” For Frank, the main reason behind the
underdevelopment of developing could be traced to their colonial history.
In his famous article, ‘The development of underdevelopment, Frank argues
that ‘Underdevelopment is not due to the survival of archaic institutions and the existence
of capital shortage in regions that have remained isolated from the stream of world
history. On the contrary, underdevelopment was and still is generated by the very
same historical process which also generated economic development: the development
of capitalism itself.’ He further (1967,1969) includes that ‘most of the theoretical
categories and development policies in the modernization school have been distilled
exclusively from the historical experience of European and North American capitalist
nation. To this extent, these western theoretical categories are unable to guide our
understanding of the problems facing Third World nations.
The Development of Underdevelopment: Satellites and Metropoles
Frank formulated his ideas of underdevelopment by analyzing the system of capitalism.
Capitalist nations always present external explanations for the underdevelopment of
third-world nations. According to modernization theorists, the reasons for
underdevelopment could be found in the nations such as: traditional culture,
overpopulation, little investment, lack of motivation, etc. To counter this argument
Frank proposed an external explanation. According to him, ‘modernization theory
generalizes this whole concept of underdevelopment by presenting this cause from an
internal point of view. He argues that Third-World countries could never follow a
similar path as followed by western countries because they have experienced exploitation
under colonization. ‘The backwardness of Third world countries cannot be explained
by feudalism or traditionalism. In fact, it is wrong to characterize third-world countries
as “primitive”, “feudal” or “traditional”, because many countries- such as China and
India were quite advanced before they encountered colonialism in the eighteenth century.
Instead, the historical experience of colonialism and foreign domination has reversed
the development of many “advanced” Third World countries and forced them to move
along the path of economic backwardness’. In simple words, the concept of “The
development of underdevelopment” is to explain the causes of underdevelopment
through historical colonial domination in Third-World Countries. To explain the Self-Instructional
Material 125

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES relationship between developed and underdeveloped countries, Frank has formulated
a “metropolis-satellite” model. Here metropolis denoted the developed countries, on
the other hand, the satellite was used for underdeveloped countries. This relation between
metropolis and satellite could be seen from the colonization era. These metropolis
countries try to transfer the economic surplus from satellite to their respective countries.
Due to this draining of resources, these satellite countries are not able to strengthen
their economy, even after the decolonization. In other words, the historical process
that generates development in western metropolises causes simultaneous
underdevelopment in satellite countries. In his metropolis-satellite model, Frank has
proposed several interesting hypotheses concerning Third-World development:
 Hypothesis 1: In contrast to the development of the world metropolis, which is
no one’s satellite, the development of national and other subordinate metropolises
is limited by their satellite statuses. For example, Frank argues that third-world
countries would not go through a similar path of development by industrialization
as followed by the western world.
 Hypothesis 2: The satellites experience their greatest economic development
when their ties to the metropolis are weakest. For example, Frank observed
through their experience of Latin America that during its isolation period in World
War I, Latin America experienced a great level of industrialization.
 Hypothesis 3: When the metropolis recovers from its crisis and re-establishes
the trade and investment ties that then fully reincorporate the satellites into the
system, the previous industrialization of these regions are choked off.
 Hypothesis 4: The regions that are the most underdeveloped and feudal today
are those that had the closest ties to the metropolises in the past.
Basic Premises of the theory of Underdevelopment
 Underdevelopment theory tries to explain the reason for underdevelopment
through the historical perspective of the political economy.
 Underdevelopment theory is the extension of the dependency theory of
development.
 The level of ties between metropolis and satellite countries could be reflected
through the degree of underdevelopment in satellite countries.
Self-Instructional
126 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

 The drainage of resources from satellite countries to metropolises is the main NOTES
reason behind the underdevelopment.
Criticism of the theory of Underdevelopment
 Underdevelopment theory of development focuses only on the economic
perspective and neglected the other social, political, and cultural aspects of
underdevelopment.
 This theory is criticized for its extensive pessimistic attitude towards capitalism.
 In the globalized world, it is not possible for any country to develop its
industrialized system in isolation.

7.7 WORLD SYSTEM THEORY

World System Theory has been closely associated with the renowned thinker Immanuel
Wallerstein and his breathtaking work in the 1970s in the field of sociology. Wallerstein’s
work developed as an alternative explanation regarding the prevalent approaches of
modernization and development at that time. There are three major intellectual building
blocks that inspired Wallerstein to formalize world system theory: The Annales School,
Marx, and the dependency school.
According to Wallerstein, “A world system is a social system, one that has
boundaries, structures, member groups, rule of legitimation, and coherence. Its life is
made up of conflicting forces which hold it together by tension and tear it apart as each
group seeks eternally to remold to its advantage. It has the characteristics change in
some respects and remain stable in other. Life within it is largely self-contained and the
dynamics of its development are largely internal’ (Wallerstein, p.347). A world system
is what Wallerstein terms a “world economy”, integrated through the market rather
than a political center, in which two or more regions are interdependent with respect to
necessities like food, fuel and protection and two or more polities compete for
domination without the emergence of one single center forever (GoldFrank,2000). In
other words Wallerstein describes world system theory as a division of labor. This
division of labor could be understood as a relationship between the forces and relation
of production of the world economy as a whole and it leads to the existence of two Self-Instructional
interdependent regions: Core and Periphery. Material 127

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES World system theory as an extension and critique of the Modernization theory
of development
World system theory represents an extension of dependency theory, which was
formulated as a critique of the modernization theory of development. Like dependency
theory, Wallerstein challenged the universal path of development offered by the
modernization theory. However, in contrast to dependency theory, this theory recognizes
the minimal benefits enjoyed by the low-status countries in the world system.
Core, Periphery and Semi-Periphery
According to Wallerstein the origin and expansion of capitalism created the international
division of labor that divided the world into four economic zones; Core, Periphery,
Semi-Periphery and External Areas.
 Core
o Core countries are the most economically and militarily powerful countries in
the world.
o These countries are known for their highly skilled and industrialization. They are
the owners of the means of production.
o Core countries are the producers of manufacturing goods.
o They get significant advantages by dominating and exploiting periphery countries.
o They increase their profit in the periphery countries by selling their manufactured
goods in the periphery countries’ domestic market.
 Periphery
o These countries are economically and militarily marginalized countries of the
world.
o They have a very little portion of the world’s means of production with a pool of
unskilled labor.
o They are the primary exporters of raw materials to the core nations.
o Existence of a high degree of social inequalities.
o They are exploited by multinational and transnational corporations from core
countries.
Self-Instructional
128 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

 Semi-Periphery NOTES
o They are known as intermediate countries between core and periphery countries.
o These countries try their best to prevent them from falling into periphery countries
and attempt to transform their position into core countries.
o These are industrialized and developing countries in the world.
o They have relations of export and import from both core and periphery countries.
o The existence of semi-peripheral countries is crucial for the world system, as
they act as a buffer between the core and periphery.
Wallerstein also describes the fourth division of labor as external areas. These
are considered as the areas outside the capitalist system. These areas are also known
as closed systems. Russia includes this area until 20th century.

7.8 SUMMARY

In this lesson, we have understood the following theoretical points regarding the political
economy approach:
 Modernization theory presents the optimistic version of development in which
underdeveloped states must pass through different stages to reach the final stage
of capitalism, which the developed countries had passed long ago.
 Dependency theory was the first to criticize the premises of the modernization
theory of development that explains the underdevelopment of a country through
its internal factors. On the other hand, dependency theory claims that this
underdevelopment should be analyzed through external factors that make third-
world countries dependent on the other part of the world.
 Underdevelopment of development concept was presented by renowned political
economist ‘Ander Gunder Frank’. According to him, the concept of “The
development of underdevelopment” is to explain the causes of underdevelopment
through historical colonial domination in Third-World Countries. To explain the
relationship between developed and underdeveloped countries, Frank has
Self-Instructional
Material 129

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES formulated a “metropolis-satellite” model. Here metropolis denoted the

developed countries, on the other hand, the satellite was used for underdeveloped
countries.
 World system theory, like dependency theory, suggests that wealthy countries
benefit from other countries, however, this model recognizes the minimal benefits
that are enjoyed by the low-status countries in the world system. The theory
originated with sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein, who suggests that the way a
country is integrated into the capitalist world system determines how economic
development takes place in that country.

7.9 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

Essay Questions
1. Explains the relevance of the political economy approach in the discipline of
comparative politics.
2. Explain the reasons for the criticism of the modernization theory of development.
3. What are the reasons for the emergence of the dependency model in Latin
America?
4. Describes the reasons for the failure of the modernization theory of development.
5. Explains the international division of labor by Wallerstein.

Multiple-Choice Questions

1. What are the main reasons for criticism of the modernization theory of
development?
a) Focused on industrialization.
b) Negligence for Indigenous Culture
c) For giving an internal explanation of underdevelopment
d) All of the above

Self-Instructional
130 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Approaches to Studying Comparative Politics: Political Economy - ...

2. Who has propounded the theory of the world system? NOTES

a) Andre Gunder Frank
b) Dos Santos
c) Immanuel Wallerstein
d) Paul Prebisch
3. Who is the author of the book ‘The Stages of Economic growth: A Non-
Communist Manifesto’?
a) Daniel Lerner
b) Max Weber
c) Walt Rostow
d) None of the above
4. What is the similarity between dependency theory and world system theory?
a) Both criticize the modernization theory of development.
b) Both give an alternative to explain the reason for underdevelopment.
c) Both theories were influenced by Marxist ideology.
d) All of the above
5. Who was the metropolis in the metropolis-satellite system by Frank?
a) Third-world Countries
b) Latin America
c) African Countries
d) Western Countries

7.10 REFERENCES

 Chilcote, R. H. (2000) Comparative Inquiry in Politics and Political

Economy: Theories and Issues, Oxford: Westview Press, pp. 31-52, pp. 57-
81.
Self-Instructional
Material 131

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES  Esteva, G. (2010) Developments in Sachs, W. (Eds.), The Development

Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (2nd ed.). London: Zed Books,
pp.1-23.
 So, A.Y. (1990) Social Changes and Development: Modernization,
Dependency and World-System Theories. London: Sage, pp. 91-109.
 Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist
System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis, Comparative Studies in Society
and History, Vol.16, pp. 38-415.
 Rostow, W.W (1960). The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist
Manifesto, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
 Frank, A.G (1975). On Capitalist Underdevelopment, Oxford University
Press: Bombay.
 Landman, Todd. (2000). Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics: An
Introduction. Routledge: London.
 Mohanty, Manoranjan. (1975). ‘Comparative Political Theory and Third World
Sensitivity’. Teaching Politics, No.1 & 2.
 Lim, C. Timothy. (2006). Comparative politics: An Introduction to
Approaches and Issues. Boulder, Colorado, Lynne Reiner.
 Chilcote, H Ronald. (1994). Theories of Comparative Politics, Westview
Press.
 Limequeco, Peter and Bruco McFralane. (1983). Neo- Marxist Theories of
Development. Croom Helm and St. Martin Press: London.

Self-Instructional
132 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Unit VI

Lesson 8 Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in

Comparative Politics, Political Representation:
Women in Government and Politics
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

LESSON 8 NOTES

GENDERING COMPARATIVE POLITICS -

THE GENDER LACUNA IN COMPARATIVE
POLITICS, POLITICAL REPRESENTATION:
WOMEN IN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
Dr. Latika Bishnoi
Assistant Professor,
Sri Venkatewara College, DU
Structure
8.1 Learning Objectives
8.2 Introduction
8.3 Gender Lacuna in Comparative Politics
8.4 Mainstream Research, the Gender Research and Democratisation
8.5 Gender Lacuna: Achievements and Challenges
8.6 Political Representation: Women in Government and Politics
8.7 United States of America and Women Political Participation
8.8 India and Women Political Participation
8.9 Summary
8.10 Self - Assessment Questions
8.11 References

8.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

The idea of democracy is to bring equality and liberty to every society. While democracy
represents the citizenry, the democratization process intends to understand inclusiveness,
marginality, representation and decision making. While in some liberal regimes these
issues have been taken into account, the other regimes still have a long way to go in the
democratisation process. Also, because the leadership in these regimes has been limited
to the political elites who are mostly men. The gender lacuna intends to explore the
Self-Instructional
Material 135

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES gender imbalance in politics. Women underrepresentation in politics and decision making
has been overlooked in several societies that also fail to bring to light opportunities for
women representation in politics. Several women mobilization have now and again
asserted on the gendered gaps that marginalize women. The question to be observed
is how do we observe a woman’s movement in comparative political analysis? Do we
analyze it has been one single variable in a larger study of democratization or do we
understand it as a study that can lead to democratization. Gendering lacuna as a subject
has only recently gained importance in comparative politics. The objective of study in
this lesson is to understand gender and comparative politics instead of different research
and observe why women representation has been overlooked in politics. An analysis
of comparative literature of different democratic regimes has been observed as a key
to political analysis of understanding women marginalization in politics.

8.2 INTRODUCTION

Gender lacuna is an understanding of the gaps and differences in the study of gender
and political science, especially in the study of comparative politics. Women’s narratives,
perspectives and experiences have been closely observed in gender studies but despite
that there remains a wide substantial gap in comparative literature in the study and
inclusion of women representation in politics.
The reasons could be manifold. The fact that the women movements have been
less acknowledged, the study has been acknowledged to a certain limit regarding
which the movement has taken place, women’s rights have remained a small sub field
and have not been given importance in comparative political literature, women have
been conditioned to vote in a certain manner, voting behaviour is conformed in a
certain manner, despite being elected women are not part of the decision making in the
legislatures, women education in some decries have been less leading to their voting
behaviour, their needs have been different. In political parties, male candidates are
given more preferences than the female candidates, there are ambivalent conclusions
when it comes to women voting behaviour, traditional gender roles limit their
opportunities, women are encouraged less to be part of the politics, depending on
Self-Instructional
their families, leading to gender gaps in political representation. This tends to evaluate
136 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

the gender lacuna in political representation of women in comparative literature. Why NOTES
certain democracies have more women representatives than men (if at all)? What do
democracies do to limit this gender gap? How women mobilization analyzed in this
framework? All comprise the gender lacuna that needs to be observed considering the
less participation and representation of women in politics.

8.3 GENDER LACUNA IN COMPARATIVE POLITICS

The process of democratization asserts the idea of inclusiveness. Scholars observe

that there has been less attention on gender in politics.1 Gender’s relevance to politics
has been rarely observed by the mainstream scholars and its non-relevance to politics
is even overlooked by the gender researchers. There is a concern that the scholarship
on gender-based research has been institutionalized and rather become a subfield to
the study of politics.2
Gender based research has become a part of several studies in the past decades,
but it is still not considered a part of the mainstream subject of political science. Gender
scholarship have now again tried to understand the behaviours, patters and even
emotions which have been laid out in the form of reels and texts but there is a certain
loss in pattern while placing women and politics together in the research. Gender
studies have still not been adhered to as a ‘legitimate theoretical approach’. While
several research lays down the importance of values, cultural understanding and
difference, the process of understanding the role of women in transition and in
democratization process has largely been overlooked. The problems of women have
been cited by gender scholars, but their participation and their gendered nature has
been overlooked.3
Despite several research on the democratization process, there is rare study
that accounts for gender and women or their work. The fact that we overlook the
understanding of women in democracy and how her participation has been in the past
few decades brings to light how gender as a study is still not considered vital. A political
analysis in comparative studies on gender lacuna needs greater emphasis to understand
the process of democratization, it was because women were marginalized and their
absence in the main field of politics was meagre, that led to the study of women and Self-Instructional
Material 137

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES politics. This study is an attempt to understand gender lacuna in comparative politics
and to incorporate their role in the process of democratization.

8.4 THE MAINSTREAM RESEARCH, THE GENDER

RESEARCH AND DEMOCRATISATION

Scholars argue that the problem lays in the approach to the two problems: understanding
the gender lacuna within mainstream comparative politics and the integration of women.
The process as to how these two rely on each other and how these variables have
been questioned have only led to widening the gap. There are also the assumptions
made by several scholars belonging to these two groups. The mainstream scholars
believe that being a different category study may not be a problem. Other studies like
social movements and several other methods are also subfields and gender like others
is just one variable among several others.
Lisa Baldez points out both the definitions can be problematic while considering
women and gender and democratization, to what she calls an ‘elite focus’. The definition
of gender tends to be overlooked in the comparative study on democratization literature
despite it being a concept that is contested. The fact that the definition of democracy
as a variable that is dichotomous does not bring to light the issues from the perspective
of gender until citizenship rights pertaining to women in democratic societies are brought
to forefront by scholars. Women’s rights have been overlooked as democratic in certain
regimes. Examples from history being that there was less blood shed for the rights and
women suffrage than that of men.4 Women’s mobilization and activism for suffrage has
been overlooked by politicians. Baldez points that any regime cannot be considered
democratic if it overlooks the inclusion of women despite the fact women comprise
half the population of the world. The expiation of democratization process overlooks
several process that include women’s mobilizations, their struggles against tyranny and
policies that are women friendly.
The elite focus, Baldez points out inhibits the role of women in democratic
transition but nonetheless should not prevent from asking the question as to why is it
that the political elites across the world are mostly men?
Self-Instructional
138 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

Gender perspective can also be analyzed even by the lens of elite centered NOTES
approach where one can try and understand why only certain people and not others
become political elites. Non gender approaches tend to understand only the people
who participate in the process of democratization and not others who do not. The
question still remains why they do not? The suggestion by Munck could be considered
vital while taking into account the gender approach as “recast the issue of which actors
are relevant to the consolidation of democracy as an empirical question.”5 The question
to put forward is that instead of questioning the fact that why most men are the political
elites, one could try and understand as to why certain people are supported by the
citizens in democratization. In military regimes where masculinity is the base, there is a
good chance that women could be supported because of them being caring and
empathetic. Such questions need to be more emphasized and comprehended.
The second approach is to bring to light how elite views are affected by women’s
mobilizations. Elite reforms are rarely discussed in the democratization process and
their decisions are based on popular support. Valerie Bunce argues that such support
is centered on mass mobilizations, where the participation of women is seen at large.
The shift in questions could be as to what makes an elite consider a reform? Is it mass
mobilization? Are the dissents of women taken into account? Bunce says that if these
questions are taken into account, then women’s influence maybe be better agreed
upon and taken into account in the transition process where mobilizations play a vital
role in elite decision making.
M. Steven Fish further argues how status of women shows low status of
democratization in Islamic countries where women’s bodies have become area of
religious- secular issue central struggle for control. Islamic countries like Afghanistan
have witnessed a fierce conflict between reformers and traditionalists over the
improvement of status of women. Recent developments have further witnessed how
women have been removed from political offices, are not allowed to go to school and
be a part of media houses. Fish points out this patriarchal culture has emanated from
historical struggle. This study of gender and how it is integrated has further paved way
for a new study in comparative politics and gender.
Studies on democratization relies on the normative study that it is the other
regimes where democracy can be successful. This cannot be true when it comes to
Self-Instructional
Material 139

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES women as sometimes gender equality can also be worsened in a democratic state.
Studies show that women that democratic establishment have paved way for exclusion
of women from political powers where women and their roles have been limited, to be
visible in several contexts. In India, for examples the social reform movements and the
abolition of the certain institutions in the name of morality, equality and upliftment have
further marginalized women (For example, the devadasi pratha where women’s agency
was subjugated).6 Democracy does pave way for equality and liberty but at the same
time one cannot overlook how women have been subjugated in the name of democratic
regimes, argues Baldez.
The mainstream scholars look at the women movements as just a single occurrence
and hence heed less importance to it. Scholars on gender understand that the women’s
movements have unique features of study which cannot be explained when compared
to other non-gender research. The unique position of women in the political system
may require convincing. Baldez argues that women it may not be necessary that a
woman’s movement needs to be always explained in a gender analysis, it can also
look at it in a non-gender manner.

8.5 GENDER LACUNA: ACHIEVEMENTS AND

CHALLENGES

The past decade has witnessed the advance of several political scientists as identifying
themselves as comparativists. Several political and gender scholars especially have
been associating themselves with this subfield. The reasons could be because this area
lacks hegemonic agenda where gender is the key focus in comparative political analysis,
there is an interest in new areas of research, methodological pluralism is analyzed
deeply, and field work is given an important area of understanding the research.7
Though recently, it has been observed that gender research has been less
assimilated in comparative politics literature. Few argue because the focus is more on
gender than on comparative studies, the research by the feminists has been given less
importance in the subfield, due to the fact that the literature is not vital for “mainstream’
and has separate issues.8 Yet it is vital to understand and explore how gender can help
Self-Instructional
140 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

in understanding several political dynamics. New challenges can be observed and NOTES
learned in the process of comprehending an incorporating it in comparative political
analysis.
The fear of “engendering” the subfield has perhaps been observed by several
scholars. Analyzing gender in it as dependent or independent variable can perhaps
give greater understanding to the study. Several have even asserted to moving the
study from “woman” to “gender”, where the emphasis on the latter is observed as a
fact that it can pave way for several other research areas.9
There are at least two strategies that should be taken into account by researchers
on gender according to Leslie Schwindt- Byer. Firstly, within the developments that
are happening globally they should take into account the finding from a specific country
and secondly, they should assert on how gender can cut across other areas of research;
research what she terms as an “added- value” research based on non- gender studies,
evaluating new theories and how they can bring a difference in the political process.
Though like several intersectional studies concerns, this study needs to be careful as
well as it can overlook certain understandings of feminist research in the process of
becoming a more legitimate study in political science. It is vital to balance such study.
While trying to analyze Comparative Politics from a gender perspective Monal
Lena Brook says that though some studies in comparative politics have now and again
analyzed from a gender perspective, the non- gender scholars have not paid much
attention to this sub-field and its contributions. Social movements, women’s exclusion
from politics, women’s role in different organization have perhaps been the key focus
of research by the feminist scholars. The study is to understand the political opportunity
structures in women’s mobilizations and their failures and success that bring forward
new understandings leading to a social change in the society.
Studies also try to analyze women’s role in political parties and how they respond
to the demands by the feminists by focusing on strategies, structures and ideologies.
How a party responds and puts forward a women candidate is important.
Another area that is examined closes is elections. What are the gendered trends
that let a woman be elected politically? Though women’s suffrage is widely legal, there
are still trends in trying to analyze the patters of women voting which are anticipated to
be different from the men. The difference in voting is also observed in some countries
Self-Instructional
Material 141

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES because of the gender gap. Women’s access is undoubtedly identified politically, socially,
culturally, and economically.
Furthermore, a vital feature to be understood is public policy and the state.
How do state polices influence gender and how the gender norms shape the policies?
This understanding could play a key role in women and law and how the women’s
issues are views and given importance in policymaking.
Numerous challenges arise while understanding comparative politics and gender.
First of all, the greatest issue which the feminist scholarship has now and again raised
is defining gender. Then how different facets shape narratives and experiences? Women
cannot be observed as a group on one homogenous definition. Laurel Waldez however
points out that despite these issues, a comparative study can bring to light the
intersectional study; and identities can be made to “denaturalize and politicize”. Another
issue is that scholars have mostly given importance to the developed nations and have
successful democracies and have not bothered to analyze a comparison globally. The
idea of general is limited to only the developed democracies. Hence, the comparison
needs to be vital while highlighting the problems of one nation that has already been
examined as compared to the other nation which has not. Another concern is how to
handle the ‘political’. Feminist scholarship have always sought to expand the definition
of the political to include even the informal structures that are not defined and are part
of the everyday life of woman than just limiting to the formal institutions. But nonetheless
even the formal structures have changed in the past years, hence it is important to
understand all the intersections and collaborate closely to understand further the
comparative analysis in Gender Lacuna.

ACTIVITY
Watch the movie Thalaivii (2021).
The movie is based on the life of the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, M. Jayalalithaa.
The movie shows her onwards journey from film star to a politician in the state in
regional party. Regional parties have supported several women Chief Ministers
for example in the state of Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Tamil Nadu have all
had women Chief Ministers for regional political parties.

Self-Instructional
142 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

NOTES
8.6 POLITICAL REPRESENTATION: WOMEN IN
GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Political participation is acknowledged by the knowledge of an informed citizenry.

People who have more opinions about issues related to the public are more participatory
than those who do not. The fact that those who participate have apt knowledge is also
questionable. Women participation is a vital subfield in politics. It observes how liberal
democracies enhance and observe women participation as legislators. Despite the
fact that right to vote was granted to almost women in liberal democracies in 1920 and
1920s, studies observe that women are less likely to vote than men. This has been
reversed in several countries like America where women participation was visible
strongly since 1980s to 2012, though male voter turnout is still more in these democracies
and the elderly are seen to participate more. Men are seen to dominate political
organizations, hold high posts in several developed and developing nations and remain
more informed about the politics. The reasons argued could be that women are less
visible than men in professions that enhance careers politically; confidence is another
assumed reason and legislatures are still observed as ‘gendered institutions’ where
men have an upper hand than women, and women even if elected have less say.
Several nations have taken formal mechanism to increase women participation in politics,
these can be elaborated as:10
i. Reserved Seats: The oldest mechanism where a political party reserves seats
for women candidates in proportion to its votes, the number of seats winning
leads to more reservation of seats to be allocated. Rwanda for example has the
highest women as legislators.
ii. Party Quotas: Another commonly used mechanism mostly in Europe where
one party adopts quota for women and other political parties follow the
procedure for the fear of lagging behind.
iii. Legislative Quotas: A method incorporated recently especially visible in Latin
America and is similar to Party Quota, only that it is validated by law and is to
be followed by all political parties.
It is argued that quotas are remedies to increase women representation. It is
observed that despite the quota the women legislators in several nations is still low Self-Instructional
Material 143

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES than the quota allotted by the party or the legislature. France for example passed a law
in 2000, but by 2012 the women legislators increased to only 26 percent. The reason
for it could be the implementation of the policy or the state and political party’s manner
to encourage women candidates in politics; and the fact that the dominance of the men
is rarely challenged. But despite these flaws, women are largely being elected as the
head of the office or the state. The argument here favors the legislative quota in the
sense if one woman is elected as a representative in the state, several other countries
adopt a procedure that encouraged women as the heads politically. Women in cabinets
have increased across the globe and openly challenge the politics and male hegemony
in the field. Though they are elected they are given to what is known as soft fields and
not fields like finance, defense or foreign policy.

8.7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND WOMEN

POLITICAL PARTICIPATION

United States is perhaps the greatest examples of democracy. As a democratic state it

is understood that women representation in politics is perhaps the highest in this country.
United States has about 17.1 percent women representation in politics as compared
to other nations of the world. The country does not guarantee equal rights between
men and women and stands sixty eighth as compared to other nations when it comes
to women representation. While understanding the political behaviour and public opinion,
it was observed that there is a gender gap between the formal laws and the cultures
and sadly it was observed that women voted more conservatively than men. These
gender gaps have recently been taken to immense attention by media houses and
scholars have put forward their theories on the gender gap based on economics,
socialization and politics. Changes in women’s attitudes have been observed to result
from structural conformation and post industrialization. The issue of woman’s vote has
gained importance lately and scholars argue that it can be elusive and substantive
depending on the manner it can be used by activists and leaders. There has been a
further noteworthy outcome when it comes to gender gaps and public policy. The
argument being that women expect the government to be more serious when it comes
to unemployment in public sector jobs as they “counter disadvantages of women”.
Self-Instructional
144 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

This gap also shifts to the fact of women’s jobs, democratization and the structure of NOTES
the family. The sexual division of labor observes a shift within the family structure
although there is less gender equality when a woman joins a paid labor job. Comparative
study on women and democratization has witnessed gaps that support the rights of
women and others that support democracy. Recent observation as the case of Jacinda
Ardern been elected as the head of the state of New Zealand and her exemplary stand
on welfarism and against terrorism made her gain support from women across the
world. The twenty first century has witnessed several women leaders emerge that
have made a shift in the policies and decision making and asserted their strong
leadership.11

CASE STUDY
Pick a country for example India and observe the number of women legislators in
the Parliament since independence. Then pick a village in a state of India and try
and analyze the women candidates in the past decade. Have you noticed any rise
or decline of women legislators or women heads? Can you try and understand the
reasons why? Is it women education, women’s fear, women in traditional set - up,
women encouraged less by families or political organizations or more by them?
Try and understand the reasons and if you can try and compare it with another
country.

8.8 INDIA AND WOMEN POLITICAL

PARTICIPATION

India guarantees every individual political rights. Women’s functional democracy can
be largely noticed by the fact that the country guaranteed right to vote to each citizen
irrespective of caste, class, sex, and religion. Despite the illiteracy in India and the
orientalist argument, India took a huge step through adult suffrage by making democracy
participatory. But how far the participation has been successful? Political Participation
is the key to understanding the issues of every citizen and making the democratization
process a success. Mostly it is vital to observe that in a diverse nation such as India,
how is every citizen included in the democratization process? India has guaranteed
several rights to the marginalized and has also guaranteed schemes for upliftment and
women representation in political offices. Self-Instructional
Material 145

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES India has had a Prime Minister who was a woman for more than two terms in
the office. The present Finance Minister is a woman. Data shows that women
representation in the Parliament has increased in the past few years. The first Lok
Sabha elections had only 5 percent women in, whereas the sixteenth Lok Sabha
witnessed the rise to 11 percent of women representatives. There have been several
attempts to reserve seats for women in the legislature. The women reservation bill was
introduced in 2008 and lapsed in 2013 due to dissolution of the Lok Sabha.12 The
attempt was to reserve at least 33 percent of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and
state assemblies. The bill has witnessed several oppositions observing the patriarchal
hegemony in politics. There has been a debate that since India has been a diverse
country there needs to be a quota within the quota when it comes to women reservation.
Others have also observed that if the reservation is given only a certain section of the
elite women would benefit from it and the marginal women would still be a disadvantage.
Nonetheless, there have been provisions for women representations at the village
making it decentralized, inclusive, and for larger proportions of women to be represented
and be a part of decision making and political process. The 73rd amendment Act
makes it mandatory for one –third of the seats to be reserved for women in village
panchayats. Despite this, failures have been observed where in certain areas though
women are elected at village level as Sarpanches/ Village head; it is the men, their
family members who are observed as ruling the village.13
A significant contribution in the study of gender lacuna in comparative politics is
in understanding the political parties and electoral systems. Political parties in India
like any other country play a vital role in nominating or electing women representative.
Traditional research tends to overlook the role of political parties in comparative politics
in political outcomes, according to Karen Beckwith. The structure of the party, the
area they would be contesting, the caste, the religion, the social structure is all taken
into account India during candidate selection. Several political parties in India rely on
connections of their families for candidate selection. There is also an ideology that is
perhaps taken into account while candidates are selected. The structures facilitate big
political parties than the regional political parties. The data on women selection in
regional political parties is almost negligible. The solution as given by Mona Lena
Krook is quotas. But as observed earlier quotas in patriarchal structures are less
functional despite being implemented.
Self-Instructional
146 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

Women in politics are less encouraged even in India where kinship and family NOTES
play an important role. Some groups encourage women solely and have made different
women’s political organizations within the political parties to encourage women
participation.
Women representation in some Indian states has witnessed a rise whereas there
is minimal representation in the other. The states have enhanced reservation to encourage
women participation in politics. Kerala has the highest women representation in local
governments. It implemented a scheme in 2010 that granted fifty percent reservation
to women at grassroots’ level. This has enhanced women participation in the state.
The state of Odisha has further implemented thirty three percent reservations for women
in local government. Rajasthan reserved fifty percent of seats for women at the
grassroots level in 1994, encouraging women to participate in politics. Tamil Nadu
further granted fifty percent seats in 1996 to women at the local government, followed
by Bihar in 2006 that incorporated the same policy at the local level.
The India state has further made certain schemes that have been for the upliftment
of women in India and while taking.
 Beti Bachao Beti Padhao launcehd in 2015 to address the sex ratio and
promote education for the girl child.
 Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana launched in 2015 to promote education and
savings for the girl child by the parent.
 Swachh Bharat Abhiyan a national campaign launched in 2014 with
specific focus tofacilitate hygienic and clean sanitation facilities for women.
 Mahila E-Haat launchd in 2016, to promote women entrepreneurs and
provide them an online marketing platform.

8.9 SUMMARY

Gender Lacuna in politics is perhaps the most under researched area. The study is
vital in understanding how many women have been represented in different countries
and how have they made it that far? What is the level of support they have gotten from
the state and policy makers? How have the traditional norms structured their voting Self-Instructional
Material 147

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES and political behaviours? What is the role of women mobilizations’ in making such
attempt to analyze women in politics? Despite several studies that look at gender and
others that are mainstream, there is rarely an agreement on the comparative study on
the gender lacuna and mostly this study is limited as a subfield and not as a complete
study. Also, it is vital to understand the feminist approaches that have long struggled to
uplift the women from marginality and bring her to the mainstream. Examples from
different nations need to be considered in the gendering lacuna because some developed
countries despite being democratic have failed to put women to the forefront and the
others despite being developing nations have more women as legislators. Examples
have shown that women tend to question more on issues of economics, an arena
considered male dominated and have been exemplary in foreign affairs office, finance,
and incorporating welfarism for common good of the society. While the structures of
the state are strong and made dominating, women candidates have perhaps thrived in
some nations despite being developing. It is vital to do a thorough comparative political
analysis and bring to light why the representation is low because only then the
democratization process would be a success. An inclusive approach that takes into
account the multitude of issues and intersectionality van address the gender lacuna and
enhance women representation.
The gendering lacuna in comparative politics and the underrepresentation of
women in Indian politics are complex issues that require a nuanced and intersectional
analysis. Political analysis provides a valuable framework for understanding these issues
and identifying solutions for increasing political representation of women. By adopting
a more inclusive and intersectional approach, political analysis can help to address the
gender lacuna, the gender gaps and enhance equality.

8.10 SELF - ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1. What do you understand by the term Gender Lacuna?

2. What is the mainstream argument and gender researchers’ argument on women
political analysis in comparative politics?

Self-Instructional
148 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
Gendering Comparative Politics - The Gender Lacuna in Comparative ...

3. What are the problems in understanding the gender lacuna in Comparative studies NOTES
Literature?
4. What do you understand by Political representation of women in government
and Politics?
5. Do you think women’s movements are vital in understanding the Gender Lacuna
in Comparative Politics? Why?

8.11 REFERENCES

 Baldez, Lisa (2010) Symposium, The Gender Lacuna in Comparative Politics.

March 10, Vol. 8/No. 199-205.
 Baldez, Lisa (2008), “Political Women in Comparative Democracies A Primer
for Americanist” in Political Women and American Democracy Baldez, Lisa,
Beckwith, Karen and Wolbrecht, Christina ed., Cambridge University Press.
 Beckwith, Karen (2010) Comparative Politics and the Logics in Comparative
Politics of gender. American Political Science Association. Vol. 8, No. 1 (March
2010), pp. 159-168.
 Frogee Brief, 2021, “Women in Politics: Why Are They Under-represented?”,
March 8. https://freepolicybriefs.org/2021/03/08/women-in-politics/
 Hague, Rod, Martin Harrop and Mc Cormick (2019), Political Participation in
Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction (11th Edition), Red
Globe Press. Pp. 223-225.
 Krook Mona Lena (2011): Gendering Comparative Politics: Achievements and
Challenges, Politics and Gender 7 (1), pp. 99-105.
 Krook, Mona Lena (2009) Quotas for Women In Politics: Gender and
Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide OUP, New York

Self-Instructional
Material 149

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Methods and Approaches in Comparative Political Analysis

NOTES Endnotes

1. Baldez, Lisa (2010) Symposium, The Gender Lacuna in Comparative Politics.

March 10, Vol. 8/No. 199-205.
2. Sue Tolleson Rinehard and Sue Carroll point out in Baldez, Lisa (2010)
Symposium, The Gender Lacuna in Comparative Politics. March 10, Vol. 8/
No. 199-205.
3. Georgina Waylen in ibid
4. Baldez, Lisa (2010) Symposium, The Gender Lacuna in Comparative Politics.
March 10, Vol. 8/No. 199-205.
5. ibid
6. Vijaisri Priyadarshni (2004), Recasting the Devadasi: Patterns of Sacred
Prostitution in Colonial South India, Kanishka Publisher, New Delhi.
7. Karen beckwith in Krook Mona Lena (2011): Gendering Comparative Politics:
Achievements and Challenges, Politics and Gender 7 (1), pp. 99-105.
8. Teri Caraway 2010; Schwindt-Bayer 2010 in ibid
9. ibid
10. As per the UN sponsored Beijing Platform for Action, 1995
11. https://thenewsmen.co.in/photos/ten-women-prime-ministers-in-the-world-
who-are-currently-serving/31373-2156
12. Madhavan, M.R (2017), “Parliament” in Kapur, Devesh, Mehta, Pratap Bhanu,
and Vaishnav, Milan, Rethinking Public Institutions in India, Oxford
Scholarship Online: May.
13. Pai Sudha, 1998, “Pradhanis in New Panchayats: Firld Notes from Meerut
District”, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 33, Issue No. 18, 02 May.

Self-Instructional
150 Material

© Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 METHODS AND APPROACHES
IN COMPARATIVE POLITICAL

METHODS AND APPROACHES IN COMPARATIVE POLITICAL ANALYSIS

ANALYSIS
B.A. (HONS.) POLITICAL SCIENCE
SEMESTER-II
DSC-5
As per the UGCF - 2022 and National Education Policy 2020

DSC-5

DEPARTMENT OF DISTANCE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF DISTANCE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION
CAMPUS OF OPEN LEARNING, SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING CAMPUS OF OPEN LEARNING, SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI UNIVERSITY OF DELHI