1. Political Science 200A Week 10 How Institutions Constrain Outcomes

2. Anthony Downs (1930- ) Ph.D. (Economics) Stanford University 1956
Academic appointment University of Chicago
Senior Fellow, Brookings Institutions 1977-
Economic Theory of Democracy (1957)

3. Downs
1. Epistemological lesson: Political scientists cannot simply aggregate individual preferences to predict macro-outcomes
2. Illustration of decisionmaking in institution-free environment
Arrow’s impossibility theorem
[McKelvey’s chaos theorem in multidimensional policy space]

4. William Riker (1920-1993) 1948. PhD. Harvard University
Theory of Political Coalitions (1962)
Department Chair, University of Rochester

5. Riker 1. Institutions shape macro-outcomes by
Mechanical effect (aggregation of choices)
Psychological effect (strategic behavior)
Why does Riker emphasize choices by politicians and donors rather than voters?
2. Riker’s image of science
Theory, testing, reformulation, re-testing

6. Riker
(p. 761): “…the law is entirely empirical, the record of observations. It explains nothing and tells us nothing about why it works. It is the task of science to explain the law by incorporating it as a necessary inference inside a theory.”

7. Kenneth Shepsle
Professor, Harvard University

8. Shepsle 1. Congressional institutions influence which majority wins
Role of committees and chairs
Agenda control
Setting the procedures
2. Epistemological point: We cannot infer intent from outcomes
We cannot simply aggregate micro-preferences to predict macro-outcomes

9. Shepsle
(p. 249): “…it is still fruitless to attribute intent to the product of their collective action. Individual intents, even if they are unambiguous, do not add up like vectors. That is the content of Arrow....”

10. Samuel P. Huntington (1927-2008)
Ph. D., Harvard University
Career: Harvard, Columbia, Harvard
Retired 2006
1957. The Soldier and the State
1968. Political Order in Changing Societies
1991. The Third Wave
1996. The Clash of Civilizations

11. Huntington. Political Order in Changing Societies
Central claim: “The most important political distinction among countries concerns not their form of government but their degree of government.” (pg. 1)
•Political communities with an overwhelming consensus among the people about the legitimacy of the political system.

12. Huntington. Political Order in Changing Societies
2. Institutionalization of political organizations
(pg. 8-9) “a political organization or procedure is an arrangement for maintaining order, resolving disputes, selecting authoritative leaders, and thus, promoting community ”
(p. 10) “institutions are the behavioral manifestation of the moral consensus and mutual interest.”
(p. 12) “Institutions are stable, valued, recurring patterns of behavior.”
(pg. 12) “Institutionalization is the process by which organizations and procedures acquire value and stability.”

13. Huntington. Political Order in Changing Societies
3. Balance of social forces and institutions
Civic versus Praetorian Politics