Abstract
AbstractWhat is the relationship between actions and institutions in state extraction? State extraction is the process whereby revenue is extracted from constituents to the state. Studies on state extraction in the early modern era mostly adopt the institution-centric approach, which perceives actions as manifestations of institutional and structural characteristics in a social context. However, it does not explain the varying actions and the resultant diversified institutional changes beyond the behavioral and institutional repertoires determined by these characteristics. This article proposes the process institutionalism model as a new paradigm for understanding the relationship between actions and institutions in state extraction. This model employs an action-centric approach, which maintains that actions lead to changes in institutions and the actors’ consciousness. It also demonstrates the qualitative contradictions among the incentives in the efficiency and legitimacy dimensions of an action and adopts an eventful explanation of actors’ understandings of and selections among the contradictory incentives during the temporal process of actions. Process institutionalism engages theoretical and empirical research on the relationship between actions and institutions by reviewing existing literature on state extraction in history, especially the history of the early modern period, the critical juncture whereby states and other related institutions experienced dramatic changes and displayed regional diversity.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference49 articles.
1. Azabou, Mongi, and Jeffrey B. Nugent. 1988. Contractual choice in tax collection activities: Some implications of the experience with tax farming. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economies 144 (4): 684–705.
2. Barbalet, Jack. 2009a. Action theoretic foundations of economic sociology. Wirtschaftssoziologie. Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie Sonderheft 49: 143–157.
3. Barbalet, Jack. 2009b. Disinterestedness and self-formation: Principles of action in William Hazlitt. European Journal of Social Theory 12 (2): 195–211.
4. Campbell, John L. 1993. The state and fiscal sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 19 (1): 163–185.
5. Chang, Ha-Joon. 2007a. Institutional change and economic development: An introduction. In Institutional change and economic development, ed. Ha-Joon. Chang, 1–14. United Nations University Press.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献