POWRE: Rational Choice and Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics

Northwestern University, Evanston IL

Investigators

Abstract

The field of comparative politics, and political science more generally, has grown increasingly polarized around two competing approaches - historical institutionalism and rational choice. These two approaches embrace different "foundational" assumptions and employ different methods. Rational choice theorists have appropriated and applied methods drawn from economics, while historical institutionalists draw insights and strategies from sociology, especially historical sociology. This POWRE award will allow the investigator to acquire competence in game theory and basic mathematical modeling in the social sciences. The skills she seeks to acquire will complement her already strong foundation in the alternative, historical-institutional approach to political science. The investigator is interested in bringing these techniques to bear on the empirical problems around which her work is currently organized, as well as in engaging current methodological debates in her field on the basis of a foundation in different approaches. One project is historical, and explores the origins of cross-national differences in vocational training systems. The other has a more contemporary focus, and addresses the contemporary consequences of cross-national differences in labor institutions and politics. Both of these studies involve precisely the kinds of problems (collective action dilemmas, for example) that have been central concerns for game theorists. They thus provide an ideal context in which to blend two approaches - game theoretic and historical institutional - that are frequently viewed as alternatives in the literature. In line with the goals of the POWRE program, this training will substantially advance the investigator's career. In addition to the contributions to her own substantive research agenda, NSF funding to acquire greater competence in game theory and basic mathematical modeling for political science will enable her to move beyond engaging contemporary methodological debates primarily as a "representative" of the historical-institutional approach. This training will put her in a good position to explore common ground and to assess the relative strengths of each approach, and in so doing, to probe the prospects for a more synthetic approach to comparative political science.