On defining institutions: rulesversusequilibria
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 6 February 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Journal of Institutional Economics
- Vol. 11 (3), 497-505
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744137415000028
Abstract
In their stimulating paper, Hindriks and Guala (2014) bridge the prominent alternative conceptions of institutions-as-rules and institutions-as-equilibria, by proposing a ‘rules in equilibrium’ interpretation. This comment argues that the task of defining institutions as a class of phenomena is different from the tasks of understanding or analysing them. Definitions are classification devices and are typically ill-based on behavioural outcomes such as equilibria. Accepting the useful insights of the Hindriks and Guala (2014) article, attention to the matter of definition reinstates a rules-based approach, notwithstanding the importance of understanding and analysing equilibria. The comment establishes a broad definition of institutions as systems of rules, which includes organizations. Finally this comment raised some of the problems involved in understanding the nature of institutional rules.This publication has 33 references indexed in Scilit:
- What is an institution?Journal of Institutional Economics, 2005
- Collective Action and the Evolution of Social NormsJournal of Economic Perspectives, 2000
- Playing Fair: Game Theory and the Social Contract. Volume I.The Economic Journal, 1996
- A Grammar of InstitutionsAmerican Political Science Review, 1995
- Human Functioning and Social JusticePolitical Theory, 1992
- Political Choice and Social Structure: An Analysis of Actors, Interests and Rationality.Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 1991
- The Concept of Social StructureBritish Journal of Sociology, 1990
- Definition, diagnosis, and origin of MammaliaJournal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 1988
- Evolution, Population Thinking, and EssentialismPhilosophy of Science, 1980
- Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology.The Journal of Philosophy, 1922