1. On „Political Institutions‟
Prof. Lourdes Veneracion-Rallonza, PhD
Department of Political Science
Ateneo De Manila University
2.
3. Two stories…
'Community-based' ‘Adversarial’
Collective binding- Creation of legitimacy
decisions to regulate Implementing ruler‟s
common interest will
Implementing disputes
decisions Actions against those
Interpretation of rules who challenge rules
punishment
5. Discourses
Normative
- justice, equality, rights
- „discursive political institutions‟ as representation
of various currents of perspectives
- discussion, deliberation, and negotiation
- discover common principles that should prevail in
society
- “just political institutions generate just societies”
(John Rawls)
6. Discourses
‘Quantified’
- „tragedy of Political Science‟ (David Ricci)
- mass data and policy analysis
- technical concepts that are measurable: „attitude,‟
„cognition,‟ „socialization,‟ „system‟
o Structural-functional: functions (institutions emerge to solve
societies‟ recurring problems)
o Historical-institutionalism: impact of „historical moment‟
(distribution of power and influence by various groups)
o Economic: rational choice (utility-maximizing individuals)
7. So, what are „political institutions‟?
Formal: “arrangements for aggregating individuals
and regulating their behavior through the use of
explicit rules and decision processes enforced by an
actor or set of actors formally recognized as
possessing such power” (Levi 1990)
Informal: unwritten rules such as „customs,‟
„culture,‟ „habits,‟ „social norms‟ (March and Olsen
1989; Scharpf 1989; Hall 1986)
8. What do „political institutions‟ do: two end points
of the continuum…
Economic approach
- individual preferences
- „logic of exchange‟ (change of strategy but not
preference)
- collective choice
Cultural/Sociological
- preference based on situation
- „logic of appropriateness‟ (locating the self and
appropriate action in a particular situation)
9. „Political institutions‟ and Change
Product of unintended consequence
Evolution „survival‟ of the most necessary
Institutional design by strategic agents
Ultimate question: structure vs. agency
11. I. Based on the ‘number of people ruling’
# of Person/s Ruling for Ruling for SELF-
‘Ruling’ INTEREST INTEREST
of OTHERS
One Monarchy Tyranny
Few Aristocracy Oligarchy
Many Polity Democracy
12. II. Based on the relationship between the
Executive and Legislative branches
•Presidential
- close relations
•Parliamentary
- politics of competition
13. III. Based scope of power of the national
government
Unitary government
- from the Greek word „unitas‟
- (usually) there is centralization of power
Federal government
- from the Greek word „feoderis‟
- decentralization of power
14. IV. Based on ‘ideological’ labels/categories
Democratic government – perfect
democracy, democracy, limited democracy
Non-democratic government –
authoritarian, totalitarian, perfect
totalitarian
Spectrum of Government Power
Perfect democracy Perfect Totalitarianism
15. „Democratic‟ Experience: Some Variations
CATEGORY ATTRIBUTE
Party System 2-party vs. multi-party
Legislative Assembly Unicameral vs. bicameral
Government Structure Unitarian vs. Federalist
Central Authority Parliamentary vs. Presidential
Local Government Weak vs. strong
16. Focus: Philippine Context
Branches and constitutional contexts
Recurring themes: unitary vs. federal, presidential
vs. parliamentary, centralized vs. decentralized