Studying Incremental Institutional Change: A Systematic and Critical Meta‐Review of the Literature from 2005 to 2015
Jeroen van der Heijden,Johanna Kuhlmann
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12191
IF: 4.775
2016-11-10
Policy Studies Journal
Abstract:Since the early 2000s, theorizing on incremental institutional change has made inroads in comparative historical analysis. In particular, the ideas, concepts, and theory introduced by Kathleen Thelen and her collaborators have been widely adopted by scholars. These scholars are not, however, univocally positive about the theory. Three main critiques have been plaguing the theory since its early days: the concepts it builds on lack clarity, the model of agency it uses is too static, and the theory lacks analytical power overall. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis method, this article presents a meta‐analysis of the peer‐reviewed empirical literature from 2005 to 2015 that applies this theory. It seeks to better understand the reach of the critiques expressed, as this may provide a starting point for improvement. It finds considerable quantitative support for the critiques, and uncovers an additional problematic issue: the tendency for concept stretching and concept proliferation by scholars seeking to overcome the shortcomings of the theory. Paradoxically, concept stretching and proliferation only further reduce the analytical power of the theory. The article concludes with suggestions for improvement of the development and application of the theory.摘要 自二十一世纪头十年早期, 渐进式制度变迁的理论构建开始影响比较历史分析。特别是凯瑟琳·瑟伦( KathleenThelen )及其合作者所介绍的观点和概念已被学者们所广泛接受。然而这些学者并不是一边倒地看好这一理论。自其诞生初期, 该理论就被三个主要的批判所困扰:该理论所依赖的概念欠明晰, 其所使用的代理模型过于静态, 该理论总的来说缺乏分析力。遵循系统综述和荟萃分析优先报告的条目这一方法, 本文对2005到2015年间使用该理论的同行评议文章进行了荟萃分析。这一分析力求更好的理解那些批判所及的范围, 因其可能提供一个改进的切入点。本文发现了对于这些批判的有力的定量支持, 并且揭示了另一个有争议的问题:随着学者们努力克服这一理论的缺陷, 这一概念有向外延展和激增的趋势。矛盾的是, 概念延展和激增进一步削弱了该理论的分析力。本文以对提升该理论发展和使用的建议作结。
public administration,political science