Pub Date : 2022-07-20DOI: 10.1017/s1744137422000170
Mikayla Novak
This paper interrogates certain contractarian theoretical presumptions concerning the development and maintenance of political constitutions. Specifically, the extent to which constitutional agreement is said to be inclusive of all persons affected by the activation of proposed provisions, and the extent to which such provisions remain agreeable, is critically appraised. For example, rectifying historical exclusions of indigenous peoples from constitutional agreement procedures, and the constitutional accommodation of demands for racial equality and recognition of indigenous rights, presents as an important motivation for constitutional change in actually existing societies. The objective of this paper is to interpret constitutional developments on matters of indigenous rights as the manifestation of complex, adaptive arrangements, instituted by actions seeking to restructure political rules and reframe the boundaries of permissible political action. Taking the Australian case, this paper illustrates how acts of constitutional entrepreneurship by indigenous groups have contributed to constitutional changes such as racially non-discriminatory treatment and recognition of indigenous governance. Entrepreneurship is seen as a part of broader endogenous processes reshaping constitutions, including constitutional arbitrage by activists between legislatures and judiciaries, and mobilizing popular support for indigenous rights. The framework presented in this paper extends constitutional political economy insights regarding the evolution of basic political institutions.
{"title":"Constitutional catallaxy and indigenous rights: the Australian case","authors":"Mikayla Novak","doi":"10.1017/s1744137422000170","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744137422000170","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper interrogates certain contractarian theoretical presumptions concerning the development and maintenance of political constitutions. Specifically, the extent to which constitutional agreement is said to be inclusive of all persons affected by the activation of proposed provisions, and the extent to which such provisions remain agreeable, is critically appraised. For example, rectifying historical exclusions of indigenous peoples from constitutional agreement procedures, and the constitutional accommodation of demands for racial equality and recognition of indigenous rights, presents as an important motivation for constitutional change in actually existing societies. The objective of this paper is to interpret constitutional developments on matters of indigenous rights as the manifestation of complex, adaptive arrangements, instituted by actions seeking to restructure political rules and reframe the boundaries of permissible political action. Taking the Australian case, this paper illustrates how acts of constitutional entrepreneurship by indigenous groups have contributed to constitutional changes such as racially non-discriminatory treatment and recognition of indigenous governance. Entrepreneurship is seen as a part of broader endogenous processes reshaping constitutions, including constitutional arbitrage by activists between legislatures and judiciaries, and mobilizing popular support for indigenous rights. The framework presented in this paper extends constitutional political economy insights regarding the evolution of basic political institutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138543711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-12DOI: 10.1017/S1744137422000121
G. Hodgson
Abstract Extracts from an important article by the American psychologist, philosopher and social scientist Donald T. Campbell are reproduced here, with an introduction underlining the importance of his argument for today. Campbell identified disciplinary boundaries as enablers of specialization but often barriers to scientific innovation and shared knowledge. But instead of unbounded interdisciplinarity, Campbell argued for focused specialisms that cross disciplinary boundaries. This argument is particularly relevant for the development of institutional research in the future.
本文摘自美国心理学家、哲学家和社会科学家唐纳德·t·坎贝尔(Donald T. Campbell)的一篇重要文章，并附上引言，强调了他的观点对今天的重要性。坎贝尔认为，学科界限是专业化的推动者，但往往是科学创新和知识共享的障碍。但是，坎贝尔主张的不是无界的跨学科，而是跨越学科界限的专注专业。这一论点对未来机构研究的发展尤为重要。
{"title":"Donald T. Campbell on the institutions of scientific knowledge and the limits to interdisciplinarity","authors":"G. Hodgson","doi":"10.1017/S1744137422000121","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137422000121","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Extracts from an important article by the American psychologist, philosopher and social scientist Donald T. Campbell are reproduced here, with an introduction underlining the importance of his argument for today. Campbell identified disciplinary boundaries as enablers of specialization but often barriers to scientific innovation and shared knowledge. But instead of unbounded interdisciplinarity, Campbell argued for focused specialisms that cross disciplinary boundaries. This argument is particularly relevant for the development of institutional research in the future.","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"18 1","pages":"969 - 980"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47557757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-04DOI: 10.1017/S1744137422000133
G. Hodgson
Abstract With its eighteenth annual volume, the Journal of Institutional Economics (JOIE) has come of age. This editorial report looks at the growth of the journal, summarises some of its achievements, reviews progress in addressing diversity and gender balance, outlines current editorial policy, and considers some further issues that are important for the future.
《制度经济学杂志》(Journal of Institutional Economics, JOIE)出版了第十八期，已经成熟。这份编辑报告着眼于期刊的发展，总结了它的一些成就，回顾了在解决多样性和性别平衡方面的进展，概述了当前的编辑政策，并考虑了一些对未来重要的进一步问题。
{"title":"Editorial report 2022","authors":"G. Hodgson","doi":"10.1017/S1744137422000133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137422000133","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract With its eighteenth annual volume, the Journal of Institutional Economics (JOIE) has come of age. This editorial report looks at the growth of the journal, summarises some of its achievements, reviews progress in addressing diversity and gender balance, outlines current editorial policy, and considers some further issues that are important for the future.","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"18 1","pages":"981 - 991"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48620711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-13DOI: 10.1017/S174413742200011X
S. Gunter, James Siodla
Abstract Widespread municipal defaults in the late 19th century prompted U.S. states to pass laws restricting the amount of debt cities could incur. These restrictions generally did not bind until the 1920s, when suburban growth spurred local governments to invest in infrastructure, most of which was financed by bonds. We study the relationship between several major debt restrictions – debt limits, supermajority voting referenda, and debt exceptions – and municipal indebtedness in the Roaring Twenties. We find that cities that faced more restrictive debt rules were less indebted by 1929. We also find that debt limits reduced the amount of capital spending in cities during the 1920s and 1930s, while stricter voting rules reduced the likelihood of municipal default in the 1930s. These rules thus determined not only the degree of debt accumulation in early 20th century cities, but also their infrastructure investment and financial health.
{"title":"Debt restrictions and municipal indebtedness in American cities: evidence from the Roaring Twenties","authors":"S. Gunter, James Siodla","doi":"10.1017/S174413742200011X","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S174413742200011X","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Widespread municipal defaults in the late 19th century prompted U.S. states to pass laws restricting the amount of debt cities could incur. These restrictions generally did not bind until the 1920s, when suburban growth spurred local governments to invest in infrastructure, most of which was financed by bonds. We study the relationship between several major debt restrictions – debt limits, supermajority voting referenda, and debt exceptions – and municipal indebtedness in the Roaring Twenties. We find that cities that faced more restrictive debt rules were less indebted by 1929. We also find that debt limits reduced the amount of capital spending in cities during the 1920s and 1930s, while stricter voting rules reduced the likelihood of municipal default in the 1930s. These rules thus determined not only the degree of debt accumulation in early 20th century cities, but also their infrastructure investment and financial health.","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"18 1","pages":"937 - 952"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44868603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-26DOI: 10.1017/S174413742200008X
S. Lemeilleur, Claire Dorville, P. Niederle, H. Ilbert
Abstract The literature on collective action has poorly addressed processes of incremental institutional changes within organizations. This paper helps fill this gap by shedding light on how the community-based management of an organic label has changed following its formal recognition as a ‘participatory guarantee system’ (PGS). Ostrom and Basurto's (2011) analytical tool is useful to describe the changes in collective rules to address collective action problems that take place in standard-setting and labeling activities. Using original data collected from the Ecovida Agroecology Network – the oldest and largest PGS in Brazil –, we study the multi-scale changes in governance rules from the 1970s until today. We pay particular attention to the links between the institutional consolidation of PGS, its recognition by public authorities, and its adaptation to legal rules. We detail analytical operators indicating whether the introduction of the PGS rules at the national level was bottom-up or top-down. Our findings emphasize how local communities have been able to both adapt their governance system in response to the official arrangements concerning organic regulations, and influence national public arenas where these arrangements are defined. This form of co-management has been accompanied by a significant increase in the number of PGS-certified farmers.
{"title":"Analyzing institutional changes in community-based management: a case study of a participatory guarantee system for organic labeling in Brazil","authors":"S. Lemeilleur, Claire Dorville, P. Niederle, H. Ilbert","doi":"10.1017/S174413742200008X","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S174413742200008X","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The literature on collective action has poorly addressed processes of incremental institutional changes within organizations. This paper helps fill this gap by shedding light on how the community-based management of an organic label has changed following its formal recognition as a ‘participatory guarantee system’ (PGS). Ostrom and Basurto's (2011) analytical tool is useful to describe the changes in collective rules to address collective action problems that take place in standard-setting and labeling activities. Using original data collected from the Ecovida Agroecology Network – the oldest and largest PGS in Brazil –, we study the multi-scale changes in governance rules from the 1970s until today. We pay particular attention to the links between the institutional consolidation of PGS, its recognition by public authorities, and its adaptation to legal rules. We detail analytical operators indicating whether the introduction of the PGS rules at the national level was bottom-up or top-down. Our findings emphasize how local communities have been able to both adapt their governance system in response to the official arrangements concerning organic regulations, and influence national public arenas where these arrangements are defined. This form of co-management has been accompanied by a significant increase in the number of PGS-certified farmers.","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"18 1","pages":"919 - 935"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44578185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-18DOI: 10.1017/s1744137421000886
G. Hodgson, R. Langlois
{"title":"JOI volume 18 issue 4 Cover and Front matter","authors":"G. Hodgson, R. Langlois","doi":"10.1017/s1744137421000886","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744137421000886","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":" ","pages":"f1 - f3"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49216830","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-15DOI: 10.1017/S1744137422000078
Veeshan Rayamajhee, Pablo Paniagua
Abstract In response to Paniagua and Rayamajhee's (2021) proposal for a polycentric approach for pandemic governance, Frolov (2022) notes that their paper focuses on preventive measures, and neglects the deeper, cognitive dimension of coproduction. In this essay, we extend the notion of coproduction to analyze the cognitive institutions that underlie social behavior during a pandemic. We analyze the role of coproduction and polycentricity in the emergence and persistence of shared mental models, including counterproductive models such as virus skepticism, conspiracy theory beliefs, and antivaccine narratives.
{"title":"Coproduction and the crafting of cognitive institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"Veeshan Rayamajhee, Pablo Paniagua","doi":"10.1017/S1744137422000078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137422000078","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In response to Paniagua and Rayamajhee's (2021) proposal for a polycentric approach for pandemic governance, Frolov (2022) notes that their paper focuses on preventive measures, and neglects the deeper, cognitive dimension of coproduction. In this essay, we extend the notion of coproduction to analyze the cognitive institutions that underlie social behavior during a pandemic. We analyze the role of coproduction and polycentricity in the emergence and persistence of shared mental models, including counterproductive models such as virus skepticism, conspiracy theory beliefs, and antivaccine narratives.","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"18 1","pages":"961 - 967"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43777663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-28DOI: 10.1017/S1744137422000042
S. Deakin, David Gindis, G. Hodgson
Abstract Despite agreement on many points, including our shared insistence that ‘corporation’ and ‘firm’ are different concepts, Jean-Philippe Robé still maintains that they are mutually exclusive: no corporation is a firm, and no firm is a corporation. In contrast, we follow standard nomenclature when we point out that all (business) corporations are firms, but some firms are not corporations. We show here that this is a standard practice among lawyers writing in leading law journals and note that Robé seems to have abandoned the task of defining the firm.
{"title":"A further reply to Jean-Philippe Robé on the firm","authors":"S. Deakin, David Gindis, G. Hodgson","doi":"10.1017/S1744137422000042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137422000042","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Despite agreement on many points, including our shared insistence that ‘corporation’ and ‘firm’ are different concepts, Jean-Philippe Robé still maintains that they are mutually exclusive: no corporation is a firm, and no firm is a corporation. In contrast, we follow standard nomenclature when we point out that all (business) corporations are firms, but some firms are not corporations. We show here that this is a standard practice among lawyers writing in leading law journals and note that Robé seems to have abandoned the task of defining the firm.","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"18 1","pages":"703 - 706"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41873582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-24DOI: 10.1017/S1744137422000030
D. Frolov
Abstract Pablo Paniagua and Veeshan Rayamajhee (2021) propose an Ostromian polycentric view on coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) preventative measures co-produced by the state and citizens. I argue that we should also use another Ostromian approach – ‘crafting of institutions.’ Focusing on the crafting of cognitive institutions allows us to understand the co-production of virus containment in all its complexity. Combining the ‘crafting cognitive institutions’ and ‘boosting’ approaches will allow for the creation of institutionally and behaviorally informed anti-COVID policy interventions in line with polycentric pandemic governance.
{"title":"Crafting of cognitive institutions for overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"D. Frolov","doi":"10.1017/S1744137422000030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137422000030","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Pablo Paniagua and Veeshan Rayamajhee (2021) propose an Ostromian polycentric view on coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) preventative measures co-produced by the state and citizens. I argue that we should also use another Ostromian approach – ‘crafting of institutions.’ Focusing on the crafting of cognitive institutions allows us to understand the co-production of virus containment in all its complexity. Combining the ‘crafting cognitive institutions’ and ‘boosting’ approaches will allow for the creation of institutionally and behaviorally informed anti-COVID policy interventions in line with polycentric pandemic governance.","PeriodicalId":47221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Economics","volume":"18 1","pages":"953 - 959"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41500333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号