IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v82y2001i2p312-328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who Institutionalizes Institutions? The Case of Paternity Establishment in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Jocelyn Elise Crowley

Abstract

Objective. Many researchers have cited the importance of institutional legacies to explain why legislators resist transferring tasks from one agency to another but leave undefined exactly what constitutes these legacies. This analysis concretely defines institutional legacies as organized interests who shape the range of options available for programmatic implementation. Methods. Using a pooled, time‐series ordered probit model for the U.S. states from 1988 to 1995, this article focuses on the transition from court‐based systems to administrative agencies in making paternity determinations. Results. Lawmakers are less likely to move to administrative systems in states where there are family courts, elected judges, and a large number of lawyers organized into the American Bar Association. The presence of women legislators, however, can mitigate these legacy effects and move the process of innovation onward. Conclusions. Institutional legacies are best conceptualized as strong, organized interests who resist relinquishing any part of their authority, even when confronted with more effective ways of achieving policy goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Jocelyn Elise Crowley, 2001. "Who Institutionalizes Institutions? The Case of Paternity Establishment in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 82(2), pages 312-328, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:82:y:2001:i:2:p:312-328
    DOI: 10.1111/0038-4941.00025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0038-4941.00025
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0038-4941.00025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:82:y:2001:i:2:p:312-328. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.