IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v7y1995i4p477-510.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Change as a Sophisticated Strategy

Author

Listed:
  • Evelyn C. Fink

Abstract

This paper examines a historical case of institutional change, the development of the Bill of Rights, and claims that change may occur as a form of strategic political concession. Understanding why institutional change occurs has generally led to explanations that focus on the desirable properties of any rule change. The presumption is that those with power change rules only to advantage themselves. In this analysis, an alternative reason for institutional change is developed from the genesis of the Bill of Rights. The offer of institutional change is formally conceptualized as the strategic choice of political parties to enact changes to forestall a hostile and potentially growing minority. The historical and statistical analysis of the development of the Bill of Rights to the Constitution demonstrates that the change was made primarily for its political purpose of reducing political opposition and less for its effect on future policy outcomes. This finding challenges current work on endogenous rule change that assumes rule changes occur solely for the purpose of enacting sincerely preferred policy outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Evelyn C. Fink, 1995. "Institutional Change as a Sophisticated Strategy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(4), pages 477-510, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:7:y:1995:i:4:p:477-510
    DOI: 10.1177/0951692895007004004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951692895007004004
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951692895007004004?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ostrom, Elinor, 2009. "An Agenda for the Study of Institutions," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 89-110, December.
    2. Thomas R. Palfrey, 1984. "Spatial Equilibrium with Entry," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 51(1), pages 139-156.
    3. -, 1986. "Agenda = Agenda," Series Históricas 8749, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    5. Austen-Smith, David, 1987. "Sophisticated Sincerity: Voting Over Endogenous Agendas," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(4), pages 1323-1330, December.
    6. Riker, William H., 1980. "Implications from the Disequilibrium of Majority Rule for the Study of Institutions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(2), pages 432-446, June.
    7. Humes, Brian D, 1993. "Majority Rule Outcomes and the Choice of Germaneness Rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 301-316, April.
    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. Itai Sened, 1991. "Contemporary Theory of Institutions in Perspective," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(4), pages 379-402, October.
    2. Buitrago R., Ricardo E. & Barbosa Camargo, María Inés, 2021. "Institutions, institutional quality, and international competitiveness: Review and examination of future research directions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 423-435.
    3. Tanner, Thomas Cole, 1994. "The spatial theory of elections: an analysis of voters' predictive dimensions and recovery of the underlying issue space," ISU General Staff Papers 1994010108000018174, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. William Mitchell, 1988. "Virginia, Rochester, and Bloomington: Twenty-five years of public choice and political science," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 101-119, February.
    5. Schmidtchen, Dieter & Kirstein, Roland, 1999. "Ordnung," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 99-10, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
      • Dieter Schmidtchen & Roland Kirstein, 2012. "Ordnung," FEMM Working Papers 120001, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    6. Myunghoon Kang, 2017. "Representation, sophisticated voting, and the size of the gridlock region," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(4), pages 623-646, October.
    7. Coggins, Jay S., 1989. "On the Welfare Consequences of Political Activity," Bulletins 7463, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    8. Brian Kogelmann, 2020. "The future of political philosophy: Non-ideal and west of babel," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 237-252, March.
    9. Bernard Steunenberg & Dieter Schmidtchen & Christian Koboldt, 1999. "Strategic Power in the European Union," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 339-366, July.
    10. Kenneth A. Shepsle, 1989. "Studying Institutions," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 1(2), pages 131-147, April.
    11. Beata Stepien & Monika Sulimowska-Formowicz, 2016. "Economic Vs. Organisational Perspective On Inter-Organisational Relations’ Analysis – Are Economists On The Dead-End Track?," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 11(1), pages 159-177, March.
    12. Micael Castanheira, 2003. "Why Vote For Losers?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(5), pages 1207-1238, September.
    13. Ayranci, Evren, 2010. "Family involvement in and institutionalization of family businesses: A research," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center (PRADEC), vol. 3(3), pages 1-22, October.
    14. Raitio, Kaisa, 2013. "Discursive institutionalist approach to conflict management analysis — The case of old-growth forest conflicts on state-owned land in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 97-103.
    15. David P Carter & Christopher M Weible & Saba N Siddiki & Xavier Basurto, 2016. "Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs: An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 159-185, January.
    16. Gersbach, Hans & Jackson, Matthew O. & Muller, Philippe & Tejada, Oriol, 2023. "Electoral competition with costly policy changes: A dynamic perspective," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    17. Blind, Georg, 2015. "Behavioural rules: Veblen, Nelson-Winter, Oström and beyond," MPRA Paper 66866, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Kei Kawai & Yasutora Watanabe, 2013. "Inferring Strategic Voting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 624-662, April.
    19. C.Y. Cyrus Chu & Meng-Yu Liang, 2022. "Why Are All Communist Countries Dictatorial?," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 22-A002, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    20. Fritz W. Scharpf, 1991. "Games Real Actors Could Play: The Challenge of Complexity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 277-304, 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:sae:jothpo:v:7:y:1995:i:4:p:477-510. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.