Introduction to the Special Issue on the Evolution of Institutions

Abstract

How can evolutionary ideas be applied to the study of social and political institutions? Charles Darwin identified the mechanisms of variation, selection and retention. He emphasized that evolutionary change depends on the uniqueness of every individual and its interactions within a population and with its environment. While introducing the contributions to this special issue, we examine some of the ontological positions underlying evolutionary theory, showing why they are appropriate for studying issues in economics, political science and sociology. We consider how these ideas might help us understand both institutional change and the formation of individual preferences.

The evolution of organizations and leadership from the ancient world to modernity: A multilevel approach to organizational science and leadership (OSL)

“…While there has been recent work in the business field concerning the topic of evolution, ranging from the evolution of economic institutions (Blyth, Hodgson, Lewis, & Steinmo, 2011;Nelson, 2006) to organizational knowledge management systems (Lucas, 2010) and to organizational transformations (Sammut-Bonnici & Wensley, 2002;White, Marin, Brazeal, & Friedman, 1997), most of the above studies are single level analyses that are macro-based. In contrast, Yammarino and Dansereau (2011) make the case that more complete articulations of levels are needed to test evolutionary theories in OLS.…”

The Diversity of Entrepreneurial Regimes in Europe

“…Tiebout 1956;Hodgson, 1999Hodgson, , 2004Ochel 2003). According to this efficiency hypothesis, countries "copy" institutions that provide competitive advantages (Blyth et al 2011;Aydin 2007;La Porta et al 2008). Substantial political reforms, however, are typically "delayed"; that is, they are implemented not when rational and informed observers expect them to enhance welfare but substantially later (Drazen 1996).…”

The evolution of Wright’s (1932) adaptive field to contemporary interpretations and uses of fitness landscapes in the social sciences

“…The authors that use fitness landscapes as a sensitizing concept mostly refer to Kauffman 1993 without going into the specifics of his interpretation and consequences, e.g. only mentioning that through complexities of fitness landscapes history matters (Blyth, et al, 2011). Authors that run simulations almost always refer to Kauffman 1993 as the basic model that they work on.…”