Under the Thumb of History? Political Institutions and the Scope for Action
This paper discusses the two leading views of history and political institutions. For some scholars, institutions are mainly products of historical logic, while for others, accidents, leaders, and decisions have a significant impact. We argue that while there is clear evidence that history matters and has long-term effects, there is not enough data to help us distinguish between the two views. Faced with this uncertainty, what is a social scientist to do? We argue that given the possibility that policy decisions indeed make a difference, it makes sense to assume they do and to try to improve policymaking.
Forthcoming at the Annual Review of Economics, doi: 10.1146/annurev-economics-080213-041110. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Abhijit V. Banerjee & Esther Duflo, 2014. "Under the Thumb of History? Political Institutions and the Scope for Action," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 951-971, 08. citation courtesy of