IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v131y2023ics0264837723001837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The credibility thesis – A commentary from an original institutionalist position

Author

Listed:
  • Vatn, Arild

Abstract

This paper delivers an evaluation of the credibility thesis (CT) based on perspectives from original institutional economics. I first ask in what kind of explanation CT is grounded. Emphasizing functionality and denouncing intentionality, may indicate that it adheres to a functionalist type. At the same time, it does not seem to fulfil the criteria for such an explanation. CT explicitly refutes the idea of institutions in equilibrium. Second, I evaluate the proposal underlying CT that function supersedes form. I conclude that such a position cannot be generally defended. Form may even in some cases define what is understood as functional. Third, I therefore ask how to explain what institutions evolve and persist if they neither are chosen intentionally nor stabilized by functionalist mechanisms like an equilibrium. While there is definitive merit to the thesis and the research it has motivated, my analysis points towards a need for some reformulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Vatn, Arild, 2023. "The credibility thesis – A commentary from an original institutionalist position," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:131:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723001837
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723001837
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106717?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dic Lo, 2020. "State-Owned Enterprises in Chinese Economic Transformation: Institutional Functionality and Credibility in Alternative Perspectives," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(3), pages 813-837, July.
    2. Ho, Peter, 2018. "A theorem on dynamic disequilibrium: Debunking path dependence and equilibrium via China’s urban property (1949–1998)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 863-875.
    3. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2007. "The Revival of Veblenian Institutional Economics," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 324-340, June.
    4. Douglass C. North, 2005. "Introduction to Understanding the Process of Economic Change," Introductory Chapters, in: Understanding the Process of Economic Change, Princeton University Press.
    5. Ho, Peter, 2018. "Institutional function versus form: The evolutionary credibility of land, housing and natural resources," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 642-650.
    6. Fan, Shengyue & Yang, Jinfei & Liu, Wenwen & Wang, He, 2019. "Institutional Credibility Measurement Based on Structure of Transaction Costs: A Case Study of Ongniud Banner in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 212-225.
    7. Ziqi Zhou & Yung Yau, 2021. "The Small Property Rights Housing Institution in Mainland China: The Perspective of Substitutability of Institutional Functions," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, August.
    8. Vatn, Arild, 2005. "Rationality, institutions and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 203-217, November.
    9. Goyal, Yugank & Choudhury, Pranab Ranjan & Ghosh, Ranjan Kumar, 2022. "Informal land leasing in rural India persists because it is credible," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Crawford, Sue E. S. & Ostrom, Elinor, 1995. "A Grammar of Institutions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 582-600, September.
    11. Theofanis Papageorgiou & Ioannis Katselidis & Panayotis G. Michaelides, 2013. "Schumpeter, Commons, and Veblen on Institutions," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1232-1254, November.
    12. Ghorbani, Amineh & Ho, Peter & Bravo, Giangiacomo, 2021. "Institutional form versus function in a common property context: The credibility thesis tested through an agent-based model," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    13. Bachrach, Peter & Baratz, Morton S., 1963. "Decisions and Nondecisions: An Analytical Framework," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(3), pages 632-642, September.
    14. ., 1999. "Evolution, organizations and institutions," Chapters, in: The Economics of the Mind, chapter 13, pages 156-168, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Masahiko Aoki, 2001. "Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011875, April.
    16. Vatn, Arild & Kajembe, George & Mosi, Elvis & Nantongo, Maria & Silayo, Dos Santos, 2017. "What does it take to institute REDD+? An analysis of the Kilosa REDD+ pilot, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-9.
    17. Vatn, Arild, 2015. "Markets in environmental governance. From theory to practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 225-233.
    18. Thorstein Veblen, 1898. "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 12(4), pages 373-397.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Groenewegen, John, 2022. "Institutional form (blueprints) and institutional function (process): Theoretical reflections on property rights and land," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    2. Chen, Huirong, 2022. "Linking institutional function with form: Distributional dynamics, disequilibrium, and rural land shareholding in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Goyal, Yugank & Choudhury, Pranab Ranjan & Ghosh, Ranjan Kumar, 2022. "Informal land leasing in rural India persists because it is credible," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Akimowicz, Mikaël & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Gallai, Nicola & Képhaliacos, Charilaos, 2022. "The leader, the keeper, and the follower? A legitimacy perspective on the governance of varietal innovation systems for climate changes adaptation. The case of sunflower hybrids in France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    5. Prévost, Benoît & Rivaud, Audrey, 2018. "The World Bank’s environmental strategies: Assessing the influence of a biased use of New Institutional Economics on legal issues," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 370-380.
    6. Bolognesi, Thomas & Pflieger, Géraldine, 2024. "Do you perceive interdependencies among human activities related to water? Drivers and effects on preferences for participation and regulation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    7. Achim Schlüter & Insa Theesfeld, 2010. "The grammar of institutions: The challenge of distinguishing between strategies, norms, and rules," Rationality and Society, , vol. 22(4), pages 445-475, November.
    8. You, Heyuan & Zhang, Jinrong & Song, Yan, 2022. "Assessing conflict of farmland institutions using credibility theory: Implications for socially acceptable land use," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    9. Frimpong Boamah, Emmanuel, 2018. "Constitutional economics of Ghana’s decentralization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 256-267.
    10. Masahiko Aoki, 2013. "Institutions as cognitive media between strategic interactions and individual beliefs," Chapters, in: Comparative Institutional Analysis, chapter 17, pages 298-312, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Dimitrios Zikos, 2020. "Revisiting the Role of Institutions in Transformative Contexts: Institutional Change and Conflicts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    12. Thomas Grebel, 2011. "Innovation and Health," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14375.
    13. Peter J. Boettke & Christopher J. Coyne & Peter T. Leeson, 2015. "Institutional stickiness and the New Development Economics," Chapters, in: Laura E. Grube & Virgil Henry Storr (ed.), Culture and Economic Action, chapter 6, pages 123-146, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Fan, Shengyue & He, Miao & Zhang, Tianyu & Huo, Yajing & Fan, Di, 2022. "Credibility measurement as a tool for conserving nature: Chinese herders’ livelihood capitals and payment for grassland ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    15. Hernan G. Roxas & Val Lindsay & Nicholas Ashill & Antong Victorio, 2007. "Institutional analysis of strategic choice of micro, small, and medium enterprises : a conceptual framework," Philippine Review of Economics, University of the Philippines School of Economics and Philippine Economic Society, vol. 44(1), pages 151-186, June.
    16. Frolov, Daniil, 2019. "The manifesto of post-institutionalism: institutional complexity research agenda," MPRA Paper 97662, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Polishchuk, Leonid, 2010. "Misuse of Institutions: Lessons from Transition," WIDER Working Paper Series 075, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    18. Aoki, Masahiko, 2010. "Understanding Douglass North in game-theoretic language," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 139-146, May.
    19. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild & Vedeld, Paul, 2019. "All that glitters is not gold; Power and participation in processes and structures of implementing REDD+ in Kondoa, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 44-54.
    20. Roberto Cazzolla Gatti & Roger Koppl & Brian D. Fath & Stuart Kauffman & Wim Hordijk & Robert E. Ulanowicz, 2020. "On the emergence of ecological and economic niches," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 99-127, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:131:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723001837. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.