Actorcentered theories: II' The role of the state Lecture 5

1
Actor-centered theoriesII. The role of the
stateLecture 5

• Health Politics
• Ana Rico
• Room L4-46, rico_at_bmg.eur.nl

2
OUTLINE OF THE SESSION

• 1. Introduction
• A. Concepts
• Actors, organizations, institutions
• B. Actor-centred theories
• Theses and arguments
• Types of actor-centered theories
• 2. State-centred theories
• Concepts state, government, political system
• Theses and arguments
• Evidence
• Criticisms
• Policy implications
• (3. State-society theories, L6)

3
CONCEPTS (1) Actors

• The word actor has two (slightly contradictory)
  connotations...
• 1. Capable of independent action. Actor, doer,
  worker
• - A person who acts and gets things done
• - One who takes part a participant
• - Law. One, such as the manager of a
  business, who acts for another.
• 2. Playing a part or role as pre-specified in an
  script
• Policy and political actors
• Organizations, groups and individuals who
  actively participate in politics/policy-making
• Distinguish between
• State actors those political actors who hold
  formal (constitutional or legal institutional)
  power to make, take and enforce decisions which
  affect the whole society (policy)
• Stakeholders/(challengers) social and
  sociopolitical actors who try to influence policy
  by exerting pressure from outside

4
CONCEPTS (1) Actors

• The most important characteristics of actors are
  
• 1. Preferences interests
• ? How are they defined (/- democratic/centralize
  d process)?
• ? To what extent are they private (less
  inclusive, more short-term) or public (more
  inclusive, more long-term)?
• 2. Capacity? amount of power (for) and other
  resources (money, knowledge, personnel)
• Action (independent or not) is supposed to be
  directly derived from each actors caracteristics
• NOTE Actor-centred theory defends that policy
  results from actors who have capacity (power for)
  to act independently and so () able to impose
  their preferences on other actors (power over)

5
CONCEPTS (2) Organizations

• In politics, collective actors are more relevant
  than individuals
• A collective actor can be
• An organization elites represent members and act
  for them
• An organization representing a social group
  elites represent, and act for, both members
  (inside) and supporters (outside)
• A coalition of organizations and/or social
  groups, led by elites
• A social group led by some elites (no
  organization)
• Organizations are actors by the law legal
  persons with property rights over capital,
  knowledge and connections...
• ... However, other analytical traits of an
  actor can be missing
• A collective who behaves as an individual (as
  army in battle) ?
• Not all organizations can be considered a
  (unitary) actor

6
CONCEPTS (2) Organizations

• Organizations can be defined differently
  (depending on authors and research goals)
• Collective actors Emphasis on similarities with
  individuals, independent actors. MACRO Rational
  choice, State-centred
• Institutions A set of institutional rules which
  determines the behaviour of the members of the
  organization. MACRO - Institutionalist
• Political systems Set of internal coalitions
  (linked to outside social groups) which struggle
  to influence organizational decisions and rules.
  MESO State-society theories, Power-centred
  action theories

NOTE To define organizations as institutions
confuses players with rules of the game, and
involves determinism
7
Organizations as collective actors

• Able to act outside the norms

• Governed by representatives often not subject to
  mandate...

• ... And to change the rules of the game...

• ...But subject to liability, accountable to
  shareholders and the courts legal persons

8
CONCEPTS (3) Institutions

• informal cultural
  norms social control
• YES Rules and norms
• formal
  laws rules courts police
• with special normative symbolic features or a
  long history
• NO Organizations (they are also but not only
  institutional rules)
• Which produce the rules and regulations (with
  power to change institutions by enacting new
  policy)
• With special normative and simbolic features or
  a long history
• ? Organizations versus groups weight of formal
  vs informal norms

9
CONCEPTS (3) Institutions

• The main functions of institutions in politics
  are
• To allocate power (and money) across actors
• To regulate behaviour what is allowed/forbidden
• Two types of formal institutions are relevant
• Political institutions Constitutional
  distribution of powers across state actors. E.g.
  Electoral system, Executive/Parliament power,
  Federal/Unitary
• Organizational rules and structures Internal
  rules of operation in organizations which
  regulate the distribution of power within the
  organization the behaviour of its members and
  elites
• NOTE Often the term structures is used as
  synonymous of institutions ? BUT confusion with
  socioeconomic structure

10
Organizations as institutions

• Sets of formal/informal rules of power norms
  of behaviour...

• ... which structure social interaction within
  organizations

• Operating within a network of contracts with
  others....

• ... and a broader regulatory environment

... pools of resources ( as organisms)
11
ACTOR-CENTERED THEORIES

• Thesis Policy change results from the capacity
  of the most powerful political actors to be
  autonomous from social pressures
• Research question Are political actors (eg the
  state, political parties, public opinion, policy
  experts, the media) capable of independent action
  (from context IGs) which advances citizens
  welfare?
• Relevance Ultimately a question about...
• Democracy ? Does the state represents citizens?
  and
• Autonomy of politics from society Can politics
  advance the general interest, rather than reflect
  the private interests of priviledged social
  groups?
• Different types of actor-centred theories focus
  on different actors
• 1) State actors
• 2) Political parties
• 3) Policy experts
• 4) Public opinion
• 5) Mass media
• 6) Corporatist organizations

STATE-CENTRED
STATE-SOCIETY
12
SOCIAL POLITICAL THEORIES
L7
L3
1950s/60s SOCIAL CONTEXT
OLD INSTITUTIONALISM Formal political institutions
SOCIAL PRESSURES
L2, L4
SOCIAL ACTORS (IGs dependent on social pressures)
L5
POLITICAL ACTORS (STATE independent of social
pressures)
1970s/1980s ACTOR-CENTRED
L6
SOCIOP. ACTORS (STATE-SOCIETY interdependent)
1990s INSTITUT-IONALISM (state-society)
L7
NEW INSTITUTIONALISM (state institutions
state/PPs/IGs organization)
L9
L4, L9
L7, L9
POWER-CENTRED THEORIES (interactions among
collective actors social structure)
2000s ACTION THEORIES
RATIONAL CHOICE (interactions among individuals
ACTOR-CENTERED INSTITUTIONALISM (interactions
among institutions elites)
13
ACTOR-CENTRED THEORIES
INSTITUTIONALISM
14
STATE-CENTRED THEORIES

• I. Research questions
• Are state actors capable of independent action
  which changes policy? Do they respond to
  citizens (public interest) or private interest
  groups?
• II. Main concepts - definitions
• State, state actors, government, political system
• III. Thesis and arguments
• Policy change depends on the capacity of state
  actors, which make them autonomous from social
  pressures
• IV. Antitheses criticisms
• V. Aplications evidence
• Accounting for American excepcionalism
• VI. Policy implications
• To foster policy change we should help develop
  state actorscapacity (resources??), as this
  would increase their autonomy vis-a-vis IGs

15
CONCEPTS (4) The state

• Political system (regime) aggregate of actors
  institutions
• Organizations, groups and individuals who
  actively participate in politics
• Set of institutional rules which regulate rights,
  power and behaviour
• State
• Set of political organizations with the ultimate
  power to take collective decisions which are
  binding for the whole of society and to impose
  them upon it (through monopoly of the legitimate
  use of force)
• Parliament committees (deliberate, decide on
  rights, control gov.)
• Government (adopts policy) Bureaucracy
  (designs/implements policy)
• Courts Police (implements policy guarantee
  compliance)
• Elected (PPs elites) vs appointed officials
  (civil servants and policy experts)
• Government
• General Activity of taking collective decisions
• Specific Political organization, with a key role
  within the state, with the power to take most
  policy decisions

16
CONCEPTS (4) The state

• SOCIAL CONTEXT The state as a transmission
  belt of social pressures
• STATE-CENTRIC The state as a unitary,
  independent actor with formal monopoly of
  (residual) power over policy-making
• STATE-SOCIETY The state as a set of political
  representatives and policy experts with
  preferences and action partly independent, and
  partly determined by a wide range of social
  actors pressures
• INSTITUTIONALIST The state as a set of political
  institutions or as a set of elites with
  preferences and actions mainly determined by
  institutions
• ACTION As a set of political organizations which
  respond to context, sociopolitical actors and
  institutions and which compete and cooperate
  (interact) to make policy

17
STATE-CENTERED THEORY

• MAIN THESIS State autonomy is the main
  determinant of policy change, and depends on the
  capacity of state actors vis-a-vis other policy
  actors
• ARGUMENTS
• 1) Policy experts and bureaucrats are the main
  state actors in the policy-making (political
  parties), politicians just set policy goals
• 2) History ( Policy legacies) model the
  institutional structure resources of states,
  making some of them more capable ( independent)
  than others
• 3) Pro-state policies are the result of capable
  states ? weak states are captured, as they have
  to rely on IGs to expand state intervention
• 4) Social/sociopolitical actors as well as
  citizens play only a minor role under strong,
  capable states, because
• the organizational structures of the state
  indirectly influence the meanings and methods of
  politics for all groups in society

18
ANTECEDENTS (1)

• Neo-marxist actor-centred theories (1)
• Social context Structuralism. Miliband 1969
• Politics is an unequal struggle between powerful
  capitalists (who directy rule the state), and a
  weak working class, unorganized and excluded from
  politics ? pro-rich, pro-market status-quo
• (Action) Policy only changes during crisis, as
  capitalists stop compiting and jointly use
  expand the state to protect capitalism
• Social actors power resources theories. Fred
  Block 1977
• State actors depend for their fiscal resources
  on capitalists, so they will be against
  significant policy change
• Policy changes as a result of organized working
  class pressures of unions and socialists/SD
  parties on state actors

19
ANTECEDENTS (2)

• Neo-marxist actor-centred theories (2)
• State-centred. Poulantzas 1973
• The state is a relatively autonomous entity,
  capable of transcending the parrochial interests
  of specific capitalists and specific class
  factions
• The capitalist state best serves the interests
  of the capitalist class only when members of this
  class do not participate directly in the state
  aparatus
• (Action) An organized and mobilized working
  class reinforces state autonomy

20
ANTECEDENTS (3)

• Old political institutionalism
• Formal centralization of decision-making power
  makes political regimes, states and organizations
  stronger more efficient
• State powers are more centralized when
• Democratic Institutions Majoritarian (vs
  proportional) electoral systems Unitary (vs
  federal) states Executive dominance (/-
  parliamentarism vs. presidentialism)
• Sociopolitical organizations Single-party (vs
  coalition) government Corporatism (vs
  pluralism) Party discipline and organization
• Social groups Single (class) vs multiple
  cleavages in the soc. struct. seen as causes of
  institutions
• Single/multiple cleavages ? biparty/multiparty
  system ? single party/coalition gov. ?
  centralized democratic institutions

21
CAUSAL MAPS
Social context social actors theories
Proposals of politically active groups
Changing class structure new social needs
Socioeconomic cultural changes
Government action/Policy change
State-centered theories
How state organizations parties operate
Government action/Policy change
State formation (bureaucratization,
democratization
Changing group and social needs
What politically active groups propose
Source Orloff Skocpol, 1984
22
ANTI-THESES

• Policy is a vector diagram in which a series of
  pressures are brought to bear on the state which
  then moves in the direction it is pushed by the
  strongest societal forces (Hall, 1993)
• SOCIAL CONTEXT
• 1) CONVERGENCE as GDP grows (following
  industrialization), democratic societies age, and
  the WS expands
• 2) CULTURAL THEORY countries with liberal
  (anti-statist) national cultures have
  underdeveloped WSs
• 3) STRUCTURAL THEORIES (Working class strength)
  the WS is a product of the growing strength of
  labour in civil society (Stephens, 197989
  quoted by Orloff Skocpol, 1984)

SOCIAL ACTORS When capitalists are strong/the
working class weak, private IGs are strong/Unions
SD parties are weak, and the WS is weak
23
CRITICISMS (1)

• CONCEPTS
• - The state at which we are now looking largely
  remains a black box (Hall, 1993)
• - Political parties considered as state actors,
  independent from society
• ANALITYCAL
• - It disregards society
• - The stark dichotomy between state society...
  should be revised to allow a significant role to
  the political system defined as the complex of
  political parties and interest intermediaries
  that stand in the intersection between state and
  society in democratic politics (Hall, 1993)
• - It mixes actor-centred arguments with
  institutional (and policy-feedback) arguments
  without differenciatng

24
CRITICISMS (2)

• EMPIRICAL
• How it is that an state with an unchanging
  structure often seems to be more autonomous from
  societal pressure at some times or in some fields
  than others? (Hall, 1993)
• US 1930s enacts WS pensions but HC reform fails
• Deviant case the comparative method
• In the UK (Jacobs, 1992), same anti-state policy
  legacies (culture) but NHI 1945 (due to public
  opinion changes)
• In Canada (Maioni, 1997), weaker state than US
  but NHI
• - the WS historically weaker than in the US
  (policy legacies -),
• - federalism was stronger (weak state
  institutions -),
• BUT (against state-centred theory) ?
• - universal NHI was approved in the 1960s (but
  failed in the US)

25
Policy implications

• NOTE Radically different policy implications of
  social context, actor-centred theory
  (state-centred A.) and institutionalist theory
  (state-centred B.)
• DIAGNOSIS
• 1. SOCIAL CONTEXT Weak WS due to unfavourable
  economic growth, social structure and national
  culture
• 2. STATE-CENTRED A. Weak WS due to weak
  (little resources, divided), captured
  (corrupted) state actors and political parties
• 3. STATE-CENTRED B Weak WS due to weak
  political institutions (Constitution) and policy
  legacies (history)
• POLICY ADVICE
• 1. Modify the social structure (eg through
  redistribution), and national cultures (through
  policy campaigns improved state performance)
• 2. Strengthen the capacity of state actors and
  policy experts (eg research, training,
  recruitment, tax policies, party discipline)
• 3. Reform the Constitution ? difficult
  history ? unchangeable