Interests versus culture in the theory of institutional change?

This paper suggests an analytical framework to bring two explanations of institutional change together. My analysis rests on three building blocks: Firstly on the idea of the transfer or transplantation of institutions, secondly on the idea of functional differentiation, and thirdly and decisively on an understanding of culture as a toolkit leaving room for interest, choice and strategic action. The concepts of institutional transplantation and of functional differentiation will be introduced in the following section. In the third one, I will reformulate North's neoclassical theory of the state and his elaborations on culture and belief systems in terms of these concepts. Section four, then, offers a proposal of how to bridge the gap between the two approaches. Throughout the paper, I will use the example of Russia to illustrate my theoretical thoughts, a country I have been studying for years and which, as North (1999,9) remarks, is particularly suited to explain the problems of economic change. In section five I will outline in very basic terms how the history of failed attempts at reforms in Russia might be interpreted from the perspective developed here. --

Shared Mental Models, Catch-up Development and Economic Policy-Making: The Case of Germany after World War II and its Significance for Contemporary Russia

The paper deals with the connection between politically induced catch-up development, cultural and intellectual traditions and economic order in Germany and Russia. It is argued that in the history of both countries we encounter significant structural parallels, including the totalitarian experience. After World War II the German political élite managed to implement capitalism in a country, the population of which was still hostile towards capitalism. The key to success was that the German political rulers, in contrast to the Russian ‘young reformers’ of the early 1990s, from the beginning on took into account the shared mental models prevailing in Germany. Therefore some lessons may be drawn from the German historical experience in regard to today’s Russia.

The French revolution and the transfer of the open access order to the South-Western German states and Prussia

Twenty years after the fall of the Iron Curtain, there is again a debate on shock therapy versus gradualism, this time with regard to developing and emerging societies. This debate was mainly triggered by Dani Rodrik (2007), who argues that reform programmes in poor countries should not be implemented according to a one fits all development blueprint (such as the Washington Consensus) but should try to relate to the specific conditions of time and space - a strategy calling for gradualism and the participation of local actors. Daron Acemoglu et al. (2009) have recently undertaken a forceful attempt to refute this view. In their paper The Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution the authors provide empirical evidence of the lasting growth-stimulating impact of the implementation of the Napoleonic Code and other post-revolutionary institutional innovations in other European countries and in particular in those parts of Germany that were occupied by France. As these changes were introduced at high speed and followed a radical top-down approach, the authors regard them as proof that it is certainly not always necessary to adapt reforms to local circumstances and that shock therapy in certain institutional contexts is often the only means to break the hold on land and people exercised by the ancient regime (Acemoglu et al. 2009, p. 6). The present paper was originally intended as an extended comment on Acemoglu et al. Its aim, however, was never to refute their thesis but, rather, to complement their analysis. --

Conflicting patterns of thought in the Russian debate on transition: 2003-2007

This article is a continuation of two essays by the same author on Soviet/Russian economic debates between 1987 and 2002 published in Europe-Asia Studies in 2006 and 2007, so now the series of articles covers 20 years of Soviet/Russian discussions on economic reforms. Should Russia strive to become a 'Western' country marked by democracy and a market economy serving the individual interests of its citizens, or was it more important to become a great power again? Are Western patterns of political and economic life suitable for Russia or is the attempt to import foreign institutional structures doomed for failure, making it necessary for Russia to find her own way? This type of question, going far beyond the realm of economics, was and still is at the heart of the debate among Russian economists, which shall be discussed here, on the basis of a qualitative content analysis of the most important economic journals and selected monographs. --

Wirtschaftskultur und Transformation

Die neoklassische Wirtschaftstheorie hatte die kulturelle Einbettung des Wirtschaftens nicht berücksichtigt. Die neuere Wirtschaftsforschung geht aber davon aus, dass die Kultur eine Rolle spielt. Wie wirken sich kulturelle Traditionen auf die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung aus? Welchen Einfluss hat die Kultur auf den Transformationsprozess? --

Die Entstehung ordnungsökonomischer Paradigmen: Theoriegeschichtliche Betrachtungen

--

Die Entstehung ordnungsökonomischer Paradigmen: Theoriegeschichtliche Betrachtungen

In der bestehenden Literatur wird die Frage nach der Verortung des deutschen Ordo- und Neoliberalismus unterschiedlich beantwortet. Manche Autoren sehen sie vornehmlich in der angelsächsischen Tradition (Grossekettler 1997, Sally 1998a, Starbatty 2002, Vanberg 2004), andere betonen ihre Verwurzelung in den Fragestellungen und Methoden der deutschen Ideengeschichte (Rieter und Schmolz 1993, Peukert 2000, Goldschmidt 2002, Schefold 2003). Ich will mich in diesem Beitrag auf das Problem konzentrieren, wie die deutschen Neoliberalen die Frage nach der Wurzel gesellschaftlicher Kohäsion beantworteten. Gerade von dieser thematischen Beschränkung erhoffe ich mir, zu einem besseren Verständnis darüber beitragen zu können, wie sich das deutsche Denken in Ordnungen zu seinen angelsächsischen Vorbildern und zu spezifisch deutschen Traditionen verhält. --

Die EU-Beitrittsländer auf der Zielgeraden: Wirtschaftslage und Perspektiven

Mit dem Beitritt zehn neuer Mitgliedstaaten zum 1. Mai 2004 erreicht die Europäische Integration eine neue Dimension. Nicht weniger als 74 Millionen Menschen werden als zusätzliche Anbieter und Nachfrager von Waren und Dienstleistungen auf dem Europäischen Binnenmarkt auftreten. Welche ökonomischen Folgen sind zu erwarten? Wo stehen die Beitrittsländer heute in wirtschaftlicher Hinsicht? --

Europa als Wirtschafts- und Sozialmodell?

Seit den gescheiterten EU-Verfassungsreferenden in Frankreich und in den Niederlanden 2005 hat sich die Diskussion um ein Europäisches Wirtschafts- und Sozialmodell intensiviert. Nur selten wird indes die Frage nach den tieferen Gründen für das Aufkommen der Debatte gestellt. Die These des vorliegenden Beitrages lautet, es sei lohnend, sich dem Thema einmal nicht von der Real- sondern von der Metaebene her zu nähern: Eine kritische Analyse der Diskussion um Europa als Wirtschafts- und Sozialmodell führt zu dem Ergebnis, dass es hier letztlich um die Forderung geht, die sozialen Errungenschaften der 1970er und 1980er Jahre gegen die Herausforderungen der Globalisierung zu verteidigen. Es wird argumentiert, dass ein solch reaktiver Versuch, die Mitgliedsländer auf ein gemeinsames wirtschaftliches und soziales Modell festzulegen, gegen den Geist Europas wäre und sich zudem höchst negativ auf die internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der EU auswirken würde. --Europäische Integration,Wirtschafts- und Sozialmodell

The two transitions in Central and Eastern Europe and the relation between path dependent and politically implemented institutional change

"The increasing gap between the formerly socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CE & EE) with regard to both their economic and political performance cannot be explained by their different starting conditions after the breakdown of the Soviet Union alone. Rather, it is due to cultural and historical circumstances that shape the particular tradition and societal environment. Taking a cultural approach and referring to the newer literature on the transfer of institutions, we try to improve the understanding of the interrelation between formal and informal institutions. Our central thesis is that the ‘reaction rate’ of informal institutions depends on their compatibility with imported formal institutions. The transition processes in CE & EE can tell us much about the relation between path dependent and politically implemented institutional change. During the 20th century the countries of CE & EE twice went through rapid institutional change: For centuries they had acculturated to Western Europe, but as a result of the October Revolution ‘Eastern’ patterns were imposed upon them. Since the breakdown of the SU in the late 1980s they have ‚returned to Europe‘ by (re-)establishing democracy and capitalism. In our opinion, to understand the differences in performance between the transition countries, it is necessary to interpret both transitions as processes of institutional transplantation and ask how the informal institutional settings in the different countries interacted with the imported formal institutions." [author's abstract