Social and Institutional change
College 1 ⑬
- 4 sept
The world is changing
● we become more and more digital
● Population is aging
● Fertility rates are declining
● The marriage market is changing
● The energy market is changing
● Migration increases and becomes more diverse
These changes raise a number of complex questions
● why are these changes happening?
● What are the consequences for the individual and the society?
● How can we regulate these changes?
A typical sociological explanation would point to institutions
Definitions : institutions are “the rules of the game in a society, or more formally, the humanly devised
constraints thats shape human interaction”
key aspects of this definition
● Institutions are rules (sanctions, taboos, customs, traditions, codes of conduct, constitutions, law, property
rights)
● Devised by humans
● Create constraints for individuals’ decision making. That is institutions make certain behavior more costly,
which affects rational decision making
Formal vs informal institutions
Institutions reduce ‘uncertainty by providing a structure to everyday life’
● Informal institutions : behavioural regularity based on socially shared rules; unwritten and enforced outside
of officially sanctioning channels (e.g norms)
● Formal institutions : official rules, written down in law or contract, and typically enforced by a state (e.g laws
of constitutions)
,Week 1 - College 2 : the micro-macro problem & theories of institutional change
Summary:
Why do we need sociology: social facts
The micro-macro problem
How to tackle the micro-macro problem
The concept of emergence
Collective choice & evolutionary theories
Auguste Comte
- 1838: the discipline of sociology defined by Auguste Comte = scientific study of society
- Comte is considered the father of sociology, despite limited contribution to the field
- For him the core of sociology is:
- The study of dynamics - why do societies change?
- The study of statistics - which processes make societes endure?
- Progress is possible through order
- But no scientific method was used
Emile Durkheim
- Emile Durkheim was the first professor of sociology
- Sociology is, then, not an auxiliary of any other science; it is itself as a distinct and autonomous science
- He was the first who applied scientific method to the field
- He defined sociology as the field that studies so-called social facts
What is a social fact? —————————————————————————————————————————
Any way of acting, whether fixed or not, capable of exerting over the individual an external constraint -> Social facts
goes beyond individuals
Society is more than the sum of the individuals comprising it; it includes social relationships (family, friends), social
patterns (demographic trends), and forms of social organizations (bureaucracy, …) and these collective forces
independently regulate individual and group behavior
These “social” facts are also referred to as macro-phenomena, which describe collectives of individuals (groups,
cohorts, societies, organizations) rather than individuals (micro).
● Social facts are external and objective features of society
● They exist independently of individuals >> beyond us as individuals
● Social facts include norms, values, costums, institutions and more
● They exert a coercive influence on individuals’ behavior
● Social facts are collective phenomena, not merely individual psychology
● They contribute to the stability and order of society
● Studying social facts is crucial for understanding society’s functioning and social cohesion
Typical examples of social facts
Context is very important in order to understand the social facts, because social norms are different for different
cultures.
- we drive right, others drive left
, - Dress codes
- Residential segregation (gebaseerd op race) > individuen willen niet perse in een gesegregeerde wijk wonen,
maar toch gebeurt dit
- Fertility rates dalen
- Inequalities > wealth, income
Do we really need sociology
● We have very successful disciplines that study individuals (psychology, economics). Social collectives consist
of individuals. Why do we then need a discipline that studies collectives?
● Durkheims argument : this is because the whole does not equal the sum of its parts; its something different,
whose properties differ from those displayed by the parts from which it is formed
● This suggests that sometimes even a very good understanding of the behavior of individuals will not help
explaining collective phenomena
● In other words, sometimes a good understanding of individual behavior is not enough to explain
macro-phenomena.
Durkheims approach to sociology ————————————————————————————————
“The determining cause of a social fact must be sought among antecedent social facts, and not among the states of
the individual consciousness”
Een sociaal feit is volgens Durkheim een waarneembaar collectief sociaal verschijnsel, wat buiten het individu
omgaat. Een sociaal feit heeft echter wel een dwingend karakter over het individu. Sociale feiten mogen volgens
Durkheim alleen vanuit andere sociale feiten worden verklaard en niet vanuit het individu. Het geheel van alle sociale
feiten kenmerkt de collectiviteit: de maatschappij.
➔ This is known as the structural approach to sociology: Collective phenomena can and should only be
explained with other collective phenomena.
➔ Typische voorbeelden van sociale feiten/ macro fenomenen zijn normen, sociale bewegingen, segregatie,
geboortecijfers, ongelijkheid en de pandemie.
The structural-individualistic research program
(SIP) : example Coleman 1990
SIP holds that collective phenomena can and
should be explained by drawing on the
micro-level
, The coleman boat has been criticized for its so-called “representative-agent approach”:
There are two problems:
1. It seems to suggest that all individuals behave and decide in the same way
2. There is no interaction. Actors decide in isolation
However, research shows that individual influence each others behavior
> Its difference to Durkheim:
● the whole is not different from the sum & no interdependencies among individuals
Durkheim already argued that interdependencies between individuals are critical —> we do not live in isolation and
the community influences opinions or choices
Emergence ——————————————————————————————————————————
● Even though the SIP argues that collective phenomena can be reduced to the behavior of individuals, it might
remain true that the whole is more than the sum of the parts
● Many collective phenomena are unintended and may evolve even though people seek to prevent them.
● Collective phenomena which are unintended in that sense that individuals do not seek to create them are
called “emergent phenomena”. = Collectieve verschijnselen die onbedoeld zijn in die zin dat individuen niet
bewust een poging doen om deze verschijnselen te creëren
● Emergence has two main ingredients:
○ The system has a micro-macro structure;
○ The entities on the micro-level are interdependent (onderling afhankelijk)
Note: There are many definitions of emergence. The core of these definitions is that the interplay of individual
behavior can create patterns which cannot be directly inferred from the motives of the individuals.
● “Whole does not equal the sum of its parts”
○ there are collective phenomena which are not necessarily the consequences of individual motives
● Can collective phenomena only be explained by other collective phenomena?
○ no. Many theories explain collective phenomena based on assumptions about individual behavior.
● Emergence appears to be like magic but it isnt. Actually, some researchers consider it the core contribution to
the social sciences
Deze fenomenen zijn dus in principe altijd onbedoeld, maar dat wil niet zeggen dat ze ook ongewild zijn. Het kan ook
voor positieve situaties zorgen waar mensen wel blij mee zijn.
In tegenstelling tot wat SIP dus beweert, interacteren individuen dus wel met elkaar, wat hen onderling afhankelijk
van elkaar maakt.
Schelling’s model of residential segregation
Een goed voorbeeld van een ‘emergence phenomena’ is segregatie van woonwijken op basis van ras, zoals
beschreven wordt in het artikel van Schelling.
Individuen kunnen keuzes maken, zonder dat zij zich ervan bewust zijn dat zij aan bepaalde geaggregeerde
resultaten bijdragen. Als allemaal individuele keuzes samenkomen, leidt dit tot situaties en uitkomsten die niet altijd
bedoeld zijn.
Schelling’s question: Which social mechanisms explain residential segregation? >> een van de eerste agent-based
modellen in sociale wetenschappen
Dit deed hij aan de hand van een experiment: The city of Schellingsdale
Main idea :
College 1 ⑬
- 4 sept
The world is changing
● we become more and more digital
● Population is aging
● Fertility rates are declining
● The marriage market is changing
● The energy market is changing
● Migration increases and becomes more diverse
These changes raise a number of complex questions
● why are these changes happening?
● What are the consequences for the individual and the society?
● How can we regulate these changes?
A typical sociological explanation would point to institutions
Definitions : institutions are “the rules of the game in a society, or more formally, the humanly devised
constraints thats shape human interaction”
key aspects of this definition
● Institutions are rules (sanctions, taboos, customs, traditions, codes of conduct, constitutions, law, property
rights)
● Devised by humans
● Create constraints for individuals’ decision making. That is institutions make certain behavior more costly,
which affects rational decision making
Formal vs informal institutions
Institutions reduce ‘uncertainty by providing a structure to everyday life’
● Informal institutions : behavioural regularity based on socially shared rules; unwritten and enforced outside
of officially sanctioning channels (e.g norms)
● Formal institutions : official rules, written down in law or contract, and typically enforced by a state (e.g laws
of constitutions)
,Week 1 - College 2 : the micro-macro problem & theories of institutional change
Summary:
Why do we need sociology: social facts
The micro-macro problem
How to tackle the micro-macro problem
The concept of emergence
Collective choice & evolutionary theories
Auguste Comte
- 1838: the discipline of sociology defined by Auguste Comte = scientific study of society
- Comte is considered the father of sociology, despite limited contribution to the field
- For him the core of sociology is:
- The study of dynamics - why do societies change?
- The study of statistics - which processes make societes endure?
- Progress is possible through order
- But no scientific method was used
Emile Durkheim
- Emile Durkheim was the first professor of sociology
- Sociology is, then, not an auxiliary of any other science; it is itself as a distinct and autonomous science
- He was the first who applied scientific method to the field
- He defined sociology as the field that studies so-called social facts
What is a social fact? —————————————————————————————————————————
Any way of acting, whether fixed or not, capable of exerting over the individual an external constraint -> Social facts
goes beyond individuals
Society is more than the sum of the individuals comprising it; it includes social relationships (family, friends), social
patterns (demographic trends), and forms of social organizations (bureaucracy, …) and these collective forces
independently regulate individual and group behavior
These “social” facts are also referred to as macro-phenomena, which describe collectives of individuals (groups,
cohorts, societies, organizations) rather than individuals (micro).
● Social facts are external and objective features of society
● They exist independently of individuals >> beyond us as individuals
● Social facts include norms, values, costums, institutions and more
● They exert a coercive influence on individuals’ behavior
● Social facts are collective phenomena, not merely individual psychology
● They contribute to the stability and order of society
● Studying social facts is crucial for understanding society’s functioning and social cohesion
Typical examples of social facts
Context is very important in order to understand the social facts, because social norms are different for different
cultures.
- we drive right, others drive left
, - Dress codes
- Residential segregation (gebaseerd op race) > individuen willen niet perse in een gesegregeerde wijk wonen,
maar toch gebeurt dit
- Fertility rates dalen
- Inequalities > wealth, income
Do we really need sociology
● We have very successful disciplines that study individuals (psychology, economics). Social collectives consist
of individuals. Why do we then need a discipline that studies collectives?
● Durkheims argument : this is because the whole does not equal the sum of its parts; its something different,
whose properties differ from those displayed by the parts from which it is formed
● This suggests that sometimes even a very good understanding of the behavior of individuals will not help
explaining collective phenomena
● In other words, sometimes a good understanding of individual behavior is not enough to explain
macro-phenomena.
Durkheims approach to sociology ————————————————————————————————
“The determining cause of a social fact must be sought among antecedent social facts, and not among the states of
the individual consciousness”
Een sociaal feit is volgens Durkheim een waarneembaar collectief sociaal verschijnsel, wat buiten het individu
omgaat. Een sociaal feit heeft echter wel een dwingend karakter over het individu. Sociale feiten mogen volgens
Durkheim alleen vanuit andere sociale feiten worden verklaard en niet vanuit het individu. Het geheel van alle sociale
feiten kenmerkt de collectiviteit: de maatschappij.
➔ This is known as the structural approach to sociology: Collective phenomena can and should only be
explained with other collective phenomena.
➔ Typische voorbeelden van sociale feiten/ macro fenomenen zijn normen, sociale bewegingen, segregatie,
geboortecijfers, ongelijkheid en de pandemie.
The structural-individualistic research program
(SIP) : example Coleman 1990
SIP holds that collective phenomena can and
should be explained by drawing on the
micro-level
, The coleman boat has been criticized for its so-called “representative-agent approach”:
There are two problems:
1. It seems to suggest that all individuals behave and decide in the same way
2. There is no interaction. Actors decide in isolation
However, research shows that individual influence each others behavior
> Its difference to Durkheim:
● the whole is not different from the sum & no interdependencies among individuals
Durkheim already argued that interdependencies between individuals are critical —> we do not live in isolation and
the community influences opinions or choices
Emergence ——————————————————————————————————————————
● Even though the SIP argues that collective phenomena can be reduced to the behavior of individuals, it might
remain true that the whole is more than the sum of the parts
● Many collective phenomena are unintended and may evolve even though people seek to prevent them.
● Collective phenomena which are unintended in that sense that individuals do not seek to create them are
called “emergent phenomena”. = Collectieve verschijnselen die onbedoeld zijn in die zin dat individuen niet
bewust een poging doen om deze verschijnselen te creëren
● Emergence has two main ingredients:
○ The system has a micro-macro structure;
○ The entities on the micro-level are interdependent (onderling afhankelijk)
Note: There are many definitions of emergence. The core of these definitions is that the interplay of individual
behavior can create patterns which cannot be directly inferred from the motives of the individuals.
● “Whole does not equal the sum of its parts”
○ there are collective phenomena which are not necessarily the consequences of individual motives
● Can collective phenomena only be explained by other collective phenomena?
○ no. Many theories explain collective phenomena based on assumptions about individual behavior.
● Emergence appears to be like magic but it isnt. Actually, some researchers consider it the core contribution to
the social sciences
Deze fenomenen zijn dus in principe altijd onbedoeld, maar dat wil niet zeggen dat ze ook ongewild zijn. Het kan ook
voor positieve situaties zorgen waar mensen wel blij mee zijn.
In tegenstelling tot wat SIP dus beweert, interacteren individuen dus wel met elkaar, wat hen onderling afhankelijk
van elkaar maakt.
Schelling’s model of residential segregation
Een goed voorbeeld van een ‘emergence phenomena’ is segregatie van woonwijken op basis van ras, zoals
beschreven wordt in het artikel van Schelling.
Individuen kunnen keuzes maken, zonder dat zij zich ervan bewust zijn dat zij aan bepaalde geaggregeerde
resultaten bijdragen. Als allemaal individuele keuzes samenkomen, leidt dit tot situaties en uitkomsten die niet altijd
bedoeld zijn.
Schelling’s question: Which social mechanisms explain residential segregation? >> een van de eerste agent-based
modellen in sociale wetenschappen
Dit deed hij aan de hand van een experiment: The city of Schellingsdale
Main idea :
