Power and political institutions
Abstract
Rational choice theory tends to view political institutions as structures of voluntary cooperation that resolve collective action problems and benefit all concerned. Yet the political process often gives rise to institutions that are good for some people and bad for others, depending on who has the power to impose their will. Political institutions may be structures of cooperation, but they may also be structures of power—and the theory does not tell us much about this. As a result, it gives us a one-sided and overly benign view of what political institutions are and do. This problem is not well understood, and indeed is not typically seen as a problem at all. For there is a widespread sense in the rational choice literature that, because power is frequently discussed, it is an integral part of the theory and just as fundamental as cooperation. Confusion on this score has undermined efforts to right the imbalance. My purpose here is to clarify the analytic roles that power and cooperation actually play in this literature, and to argue that a more balanced theory—one that brings power from its periphery to its very core—is both necessary and entirely possible.Terry M. Moe is the William Bennett Munro Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution (moe@hoover.stanford.edu). An earlier version of this article was presented at the Yale Conference on Crafting and Operating Institutions, April 11–13, 2003. The author would like t…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Institutions and actors are not power-neutral.
“Institutions and actors are not power-neutral (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2008;Moe, 2005).”
From Institutional navigation of oceans governance: Lessons from Russia and the United States Indigenous multi-level whaling governance in the Arctic (2022) · cites this paper as Moe, 2005
Cites
Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics
Pierson, P. (2000) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2586011 · Cited by 8,094 · cited 14× · see citing works
“23 See also Dixit and Londregan 1995; Dixit and Lon- dregan 1996; Libecap 1986.”
Influential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Why we need a new theory of government
Levi, M. (2006) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592706060038 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
York, A. M., Zdor, E., BurnSilver, S., Degai, T., Monakhova, M., Isakova, S., Petrov, A. N., & Kempf, M. (2022) · Earth System Governance · doi:10.1016/j.esg.2022.100154 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Moe, T. M.
- Affiliations
- Hoover Institution (US)
- Corresponding author
- Moe, Terry M.
- Venue
- Perspectives on Politics
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 02
- ISSN
- 1537-5927 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0986
- OpenAlex
- W2114343650
- Cited by
- 550
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 73 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 33.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Perspectives on Politics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Theory and Institutions
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
- Keywords
- power, political institutions, rational choice theory, collective action, voluntary cooperation, institutional design, coercion
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review