THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG

generally. Historical institutionalism deals with institutional making and political change as a
discrete process, characterized by extended time periods of considerable stability, interrupted
by turbulent, “formative moments.” 225 During those formative periods institutions are assigned
new objectives. New priorities are established and new political and administrative coalitions
evolve to sustain those new policies. 226
There are three important features that characterize historical institutionalism in the
contemporary political science. Historical institutionalism addresses big substantive questions
that are inherently of interest to the study of institutions. As already mentioned, the scholars in
this area of institutionalism are also interested in tracing transformations of varying scales.
Such scholars work best by delineating the origins and development of institutional structures
and processes over time. They tend to emphasize sequences in the development and timing of
events and phases of political change. 227
This branch of institutionalism seems not to be too interested in understanding the critical
roles of major actors and agents shaping structures and moments but rather in the major
factors framing the moments. To them, unlike the rational institutionalists, there are no
individual actors as such, whose actions and interests spurn off events. 228 They base their
argument on the unintended consequences and the unpredictability of intervening events. This
is well collaborated by Thelen who noted that, rationality in the strict rational choice sense is
present only in so far as the intended consequences of actors are foreseen/predicted. 229
In line with the above, fellow historical institutionalist Hall defines institutions as formal
rules, compliance procedures and standard operating practices between individuals in the
various units of the economy, puts across one strong point of distinction. He notes that the
fundamental difference between the historical institutionalists and the rational choice
institutionalists is on the questions of how institutions shape political behavior and where
institutions come from. 230 This point of distinction therefore, places historical institutionalists
at the center of societal institutions, not only looking at the individual for continuity of the
societal values, but looking at social relations that shape the continuity of an entire society or
polity for that matter.
Historical institutionalists therefore analyze macro contexts and hypothesize about combined
effects of institutions and processes. Rather than just examining only one institution, they
examine the entire process over time. 231 Hence taken altogether, these three features-
225 Thelen, K. 1999. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics. Annual Review of PoliticalScience 2:
369–404.
226
Jones, B.D. 2001. Politics and the Architecture of Choice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
227
Zysman, J. 1994. How institutions create Historically Rooted Trajectories. Industrial and Corporate Change
31: 243-383.
228
Grafstein, R. 1992. Institutional Realism. New Haven: Yale University Press.
229
Thelen; K. 1998. Historical Institutionalism in comparative Politics. A paper presented at the APSA,Boston,
Sept 3-6.
230 Hall, P. 1986. Governing the Economy: The Politics of State Intervention in Britain and France: New York:
Oxford University Press.
231 Campbell, J. L. 2001. Institutional Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy. In Neoliberalism and
47