Search results

This groundbreaking book represents the most systematic examination to date of the often-invoked but rarely examined declaration that ""history matters."" Most contemporary social scientists unconsciously take a ""snapshot"" view of the social world. Yet the meaning of social events or processes is frequently distorted when they are ripped from their temporal context. Paul Pierson argues that placing politics in time--constructing ""moving pictures"" rather than snapshots--can vastly enrich our understanding of complex social dynamics, and greatly improve the theories and methods that we us

New data makes it possible to measure the evolution of social program generosity over the roughly three decades since the affluent democracies entered the "era of austerity." Compared with plausible expectations derived from power resource theory, as well as prior historical experience, these data reveal a striking level of stability in benefits. This finding has important implications for the study of the welfare state; rather than focusing exclusively on accounting for variation in program outcomes over time and across countries, we need to consider why there is often relatively little variation to explain. At the same time, this relative stability at the level of programs co-exists with dramatic change in social context as well dramatic shifts in other aspects of the post-war social contract. The ramifications of programmatic stability can only be understood by situating it within these broader patterns of social transformation.

This groundbreaking book represents the most systematic examination to date of the often-invoked but rarely examined declaration that ""history matters."" Most contemporary social scientists unconsciously take a ""snapshot"" view of the social world. Yet the meaning of social events or processes is frequently distorted when they are ripped from their temporal context. Paul Pierson argues that placing politics in time--constructing ""moving pictures"" rather than snapshots--can vastly enrich our understanding of complex social dynamics, and greatly improve the theories and methods that we us.

This book offers a careful examination of the politics of social policy in an era of austerity and conservative governance. Focusing on the administrations of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, Pierson provides a compelling explanation for the welfare state's durability and for the few occasions where each government was able to achieve significant cutbacks. The programmes of the modern welfare state - the 'policy legacies' of previous governments - generally proved resistant to reform. Hemmed in by the political supports that have developed around mature social programmes, conservative opponents of the welfare state were successful only when they were able to divide the supporters of social programmes, compensate those negatively affected, or hide what they were doing from potential critics. The book will appeal to those interested in the politics of neo-conservatism as well as those concerned about the development of the modern welfare state. It will attract readers in the fields of comparative politics, public policy, and political economy

New data makes it possible to measure the evolution of social program generosity over the roughly three decades since the affluent democracies entered the era of austerity. Compared with plausible expectations derived from power resource theory, as well as prior historical experience, these data reveal a striking level of stability in benefits. This finding has important implications for the study of the welfare state; rather than focusing exclusively on accounting for variation in program outcomes over time and across countries, we need to consider why there is often relatively little variation to explain. At the same time, this relative stability at the level of programs co-exists with dramatic change in social context as well dramatic shifts in other aspects of the post-war social contract. The ramifications of programmatic stability can only be understood by situating it within these broader patterns of social transformation. ; Neue Daten ermöglichen uns heute die Messung, wie sich die Generosität von Sozialleistungen in den letzten drei Jahrzehnten entwickelt hat - also in jener Phase, in der die reichen Demokratien in das Zeitalter der Austerität eingetreten sind. Im Vergleich zu den Erwartungen der Machtressourcen-Theorie und zu historischen Erfahrungen zeigen die Daten eine bemerkenswerte Stabilität im Hinblick auf die Höhe der Sozialleistungen. Dieser Befund besitzt erhebliche Implikationen für die Sozialstaatsforschung. Diese sollte sich nicht mehr nur auf die Erklärung der Unterschiede von Outcomes im Zeitverlauf und zwischen Ländern beschränken, sondern auch die Frage stellen, weshalb oftmals die zu erklärenden Unterschiede so gering sind. Gleichzeitig geht die Stabilität der Sozialleistungen Hand in Hand mit dramatischen Veränderungen im gesellschaftlichen Umfeld und tiefgreifenden Umwälzungen in der Nachkriegsordnung. Die Konsequenzen dieser Stabilität verstehen wir nur dann, wenn wir sie als Teil einer umfassenden sozialen Transformation begreifen.

In the past few decades research relying primarily on qualitative methods has been almost completely marginalized within the subfield of American politics. After outlining the unusual organizational contours of the subfield, the author demonstrates that even as it has been marginalized, qualitative work continues to make very important contributions to scholars' understanding of American politics. Much of the strength of this work comes from its focus on the substance of politics, its configurative approach to explanation, and its attentiveness to the temporal dimensions of social processes. Despite the high quality of much quantitative work in American politics, the marginalization of qualitative approaches has come at a substantial cost, introducing a range of biases and shortcomings in the subfield's main research programs.