Rethinking path dependence in public policy research

Abstract

Path dependence arguments are highly relevant for analysing and explaining the resilience and persistence of public policies in the face of intentional reform. However, path dependence arguments were originally developed in order to explain the predominance of suboptimal solutions in the private market economy. Furthermore, there are several unresolved problems when applying path dependence arguments in the study of politics. Therefore, this article aims to rethink the path dependence arguments in order to customize them to the study of public policy reforms. This is done by revisiting the classical argument about self-reinforcing technological paths advanced by P.A. David and W.B. Arthur. After a critical review of the rationalistic critique of the classical argument and a reiteration of the call for a renewed focus on path dependence in political science, the article identifies a series of analytical challenges to the classical path dependence argument that must be addressed in order to make it relevant to public policy studies. The article concludes with a preliminary sketch of the theoretical responses to the analytical challenges and an empirical illustration of the main arguments based on the empirical case studies presented in this special issue.