IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dah/aeqjce/v137_y2017_i1-2_q1-2_p5-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutions as a Composite Concept: Explaining their Indeterminate Relationships with Economic Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Alice Nicole Sindzingre

Abstract

Development economics witnessed an ‘institutional turn’ from the 1990s onwards, with an increasing number of studies examining the two-way relationships between institutions and growth or individual incomes. Most of these studies, however, rely on mathematical models with empirical evidence being analysed via econometrics, thus assuming the possibility that given institutions may be subsumed under quantifiable variables. Many possible channels of causality have been highlighted over time and are in fine inconclusive. The context-dependence of causalities has been underscored in the literature. This paper goes further, building an original conceptual framework that articulates concepts from development economics, evolutionary theories of institutions and cognitive psychology. Firstly, the paper argues that the modelling of causalities is hindered by the very nature of the concept of institutions: these are composite entities and include varieties of ‘forms’ and ‘contents,’ which are driven by heterogeneous evolutionary dynamics and combine between themselves according to contexts. The concept of institution thus does not have the properties of semantic precision and stability in time and space that is yet required by modelling. What econometric studies measure are indeed some public attributes (‘forms’) of an institution, but this gives little information on the beliefs that individuals have about a given institution. Building on this first argument, the second argument is that this ex ante causal indeterminacy (on economic outcomes) is compounded by the heterogeneity of institutions. Some institutions have the property in individual mental representations to be more resilient than others, notably those governing group memberships: in the context of a limited presence of other institutions (e.g., those created by states) they exhibit a greater social dissemination - but cumulative causation may generate ‘institutional traps.’ Understanding these ‘core’ institutions may explain the vicious circles in which some developing regions seem to be caught.

Suggested Citation

  • Alice Nicole Sindzingre, 2017. "Institutions as a Composite Concept: Explaining their Indeterminate Relationships with Economic Outcomes," Journal of Contextual Economics (JCE) – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 137(1-2), pages 5-29.
  • Handle: RePEc:dah:aeqjce:v137_y2017_i1-2_q1-2_p5-29
    DOI: 10.3790/schm.137.1-2.5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.137.1-2.5
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3790/schm.137.1-2.5?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alice Sindzingre, 2021. "Fixation of Belief and Membership: A Contribution to the Understanding of the Detrimental Outcomes of Institutions," Post-Print halshs-03625238, HAL.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O10 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General
    • O43 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Institutions and Growth
    • B52 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Modern Monetary Theory;

    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:dah:aeqjce:v137_y2017_i1-2_q1-2_p5-29. 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: E-Publishing-Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.duncker-humblot.de .

    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.