Globalization and the Race to the Bottom  Economic Competition (a.k.a. Globalization)  Aging populations  Increasing frustration/distrust of public authority  Fiscal Crises  Economic Competition (a.k.a. Globalization)  Aging populations  Increasing frustration/distrust of public authority  Fiscal Crises

In Fact we see Variation - Not Convergence

Variation: Not Convergence Is Globalization like Global Warming?

The Scientific Method - Derived from the Hard Sciences [Social scientists] envision a world composed of linear relationships among variables, parity in the size of cause and effect, recurrent patterns over time, and the fundamental insignificance of chance happenings. Alan Zuckerman (1997) [Social scientists] envision a world composed of linear relationships among variables, parity in the size of cause and effect, recurrent patterns over time, and the fundamental insignificance of chance happenings. Alan Zuckerman (1997)

Evolutionary Science?  Evolutionary science has required an investigation of “additional principles that apply only to living organisms… This required a restructuring of the conceptual world of science that was far more fundamental than anyone had imagined at the time.” Ernst Mayr, 2004

If politics were mechanics: We could:  Assume variable independence  Omit or control for: emergence contingency Human Agency  Accurately predict change. We could:  Assume variable independence  Omit or control for: emergence contingency Human Agency  Accurately predict change.

My argument: Political Systems are Complex Adaptive Systems: They Evolve and Adapt in a dynamic environment (which they, in part, create themselves) This model explicitly brings in: Historical context (the dynamic ecology) Contingency Emergence Symbiosis and Co-Evolution Agency (source of Variation) This model explicitly brings in: Historical context (the dynamic ecology) Contingency Emergence Symbiosis and Co-Evolution Agency (source of Variation)

How Political Systems Evolve Institutions are the ‘rules’ structuring political life Institutions, like genes, are nothing more than behavioral instructions (rules). Human agency and creativity are the sources of variation in institutional evolution. Humans rationally calculate as much as they can, but are biased thinkers. History Matters: Institutions structure strategic choices AND ultimately shape preferences because institutional choices at time A become part of the ecological context at time B. Institutions are the ‘rules’ structuring political life Institutions, like genes, are nothing more than behavioral instructions (rules). Human agency and creativity are the sources of variation in institutional evolution. Humans rationally calculate as much as they can, but are biased thinkers. History Matters: Institutions structure strategic choices AND ultimately shape preferences because institutional choices at time A become part of the ecological context at time B.

Two Evolutionary Narratives (if time allows)  The USA - The Land of Milk and Honey, racing toward the bottom.  Sweden - The Bumble-bee that should not fly  The USA - The Land of Milk and Honey, racing toward the bottom.  Sweden - The Bumble-bee that should not fly

The United States: Contingent Conditions  Massive natural resources and huge land mass to exploit.  Destination for world’s greatest migration  Fear of the democracy.  Institutional fragmentation  Checks and balances, federalism, etc.  Slavery  Massive natural resources and huge land mass to exploit.  Destination for world’s greatest migration  Fear of the democracy.  Institutional fragmentation  Checks and balances, federalism, etc.  Slavery

America Adaptation and Institutional Choices  Early Century - FDR and the push for a public sphere. Why did it fail?  Both Political Institutions and Cognitive Frames are Biased against Government (New Deal, Great Society, War on Poverty)  Second best choices: Targeted social welfare benefits (esp. via tax incentives)  Increasing Distrust of Government  Growing inequality  Early Century - FDR and the push for a public sphere. Why did it fail?  Both Political Institutions and Cognitive Frames are Biased against Government (New Deal, Great Society, War on Poverty)  Second best choices: Targeted social welfare benefits (esp. via tax incentives)  Increasing Distrust of Government  Growing inequality

Welcome to the Tea Party

Sweden: Contingent Conditions  Small homogeneous population  Significant natural resources  Northern edge of expanding Europe  Able to stay neutral in TWO wars - arms supplier and manufacturing advantage  Late/concentrated industrial development  Huge conflict between economic classes  Small homogeneous population  Significant natural resources  Northern edge of expanding Europe  Able to stay neutral in TWO wars - arms supplier and manufacturing advantage  Late/concentrated industrial development  Huge conflict between economic classes

Sweden: Adaptation and Institutional Choice  Highly concentrated economy (unions and employers)  Electoral Rules bias towards compromise  The “Historic Compromise” - Saltsjöbad  Women instead of immigrants into labor market  Highly concentrated economy (unions and employers)  Electoral Rules bias towards compromise  The “Historic Compromise” - Saltsjöbad  Women instead of immigrants into labor market

Universalism: A simple Model

Increasing Support for the Universal Welfare State Sweden Opinion Balance

Sweden: A case of Increasing Returns?

Sweden’s success is neither obvious, nor inevitable.  Competitive, open economy and the “Universal Social Welfare State”  High trust society  Competitive, open economy and the “Universal Social Welfare State”  High trust society

Political Evolution and Institutional Choice  Institutions, like genes, are rules that structure behavior by telling actors how to behave in particular contexts.  History “evolves” precisely because humans have the capacity to create, select and copy institutions.  When building institutions, we build part of the ecological contexts in which future generations make new choices.  Human’s thus make their own ‘evolutionary history’ but they cannot make it exactly according to their wishes.  Institutions, like genes, are rules that structure behavior by telling actors how to behave in particular contexts.  History “evolves” precisely because humans have the capacity to create, select and copy institutions.  When building institutions, we build part of the ecological contexts in which future generations make new choices.  Human’s thus make their own ‘evolutionary history’ but they cannot make it exactly according to their wishes.