Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century

By Kevin S. Reilly. 2003

966 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ba4184dbdd46cfe8f88f3080d749bbfd492c1236

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Applying institutional theory to the low-carbon energy transition (2016, positive): “One of the most significant implications of the study of institutions, from both rational choice and historical institutionalism, has been to show how institutions constrain the pace and direction of economic and political development [6,62,63].”
A socio-technical perspective on low carbon investment challenges – Insights for UK energy policy (2015, background): “In his history of ‘Great Transformations’ throughout the twentieth century, Blyth (2002) argues that structural change and economic crises are characterised by periods of “Knightian” uncertainty i.e. ‘situations in which agents cannot anticipate the outcome of a decision and cannot assign…”
Economics Language and Assumptions: How Theories can Become Self-Fulfilling (2003, neutral): “Economic ideas were critical in shaping the government response to the Depression of the 1930s and in the neoliberal revolution of the 1980s (Blyth, 2002).”
From Catch-all Politics to Cartelisation: The Political Economy of the Cartel Party (2005, background): “When American catch-all politics seemed to reach its limits, both the state and citizen groups portrayed business interests as the villains of the piece (Blyth 2002: 132–5).”
Governing for sustainable energy system change : politics, contexts and contingency (2016, background): “There are a number f suggestions about the conditions under which profound goverance changes can happen: for example in the event of a significant arty political shift as the result of a general election, during imes of crisis and uncertainty, or more gradually via an accumulaion of new rules and no”
Accountability in Accounting? The Politics of Private Rule‐Making in the Public Interest (2005, positive): “…traditional P-A by recognizing explicitly that any particular principalagent relationship is "embedded" in a broader context of norms and ideas (Blyth 2002; McNamara 2002; Polanyi 1957 (1944); Ruggie 1983), which inter alia define the "proper" relationship between public authority and private…”
A Common Neoliberal Trajectory (2011, background): “This has taken place on the back of a less functionalist, more political reading of the dynamics of capitalist political economies that emphasizes contingency and compromise, the fragility of the political coalitions that undergird institutional construction,(19) and the ideational preconditions for”
Post-exceptionalism in public policy: transforming food and agricultural policy (2017, background): “Exceptionalist ideas co-develop with a set of institutions and often provide the blueprint for tailor-made institutional design (Blyth 2002) that reflects the perceived uniqueness of the policy sector and at the same time serves to reproduce the exceptionalist ideas (cf. Béland and Cox 2011: 9).”
Social investment as a policy paradigm (2018, background): “…ambiguous and – at times – turbulent environments, rely on ‘cognitive maps’, ‘interpretive frames’, ‘causal beliefs’, ‘common understandings’ or ‘worldviews’ and ‘rules of thumb’ in their policy-making endeavours (Blyth 2002; Fleckenstein 2011; Hall 1989; Hemerijck and Schludi 2000; Simon 1957).”
The Evolution of Policy Ideas: Tax Policy in the 20th Century (2003, background): “In short, tax reform means changing the character of the relationship between the state and the private economy; public authority is being yielded to private interests (see also Blyth 2002).”
The New Political Economy of the Macroprudential Ideational Shift (2013, positive): “From being relatively unpopular and very much on the sidelines, the idea of macroprudential regulation (MPR) moved to the centre of the policy agenda and became the principal interpretative frame, for financial technocrats and regulators seeking to navigate the crisis and respond to it, not only in ”