|
Minor in Institutional Analysis
Home | People | Programs | Minor | Conferences and Events Research Centers | Seminars and Workshops | Instructors | Certificate Program
Administrative Assistant
- Alana Bame
Description of Program
- List of Courses in the Minor
The purpose of the minor is to increase the coherence and availability
of a set of courses that constitute one of the teaching and research
strengths of the Washington University Faculty. The research agenda
includes an understanding of the origins of key institutions such as
property rights, the law, markets, social norms, and constitutional
democracy; and the impact of these institutions on economic development
and governance. The institutional analysis minor is an interdisciplinary minor that
allows students to learn about the origins of fundamental institutions
such as property rights, markets, social norms, and constitutional
democracy.
With this minor, students take courses in different departments that
share a conceptual orientation and commitment to interdisciplinary
social science.
Students are required to take a total of 15 units of credit, of which
at least 12 must be outside the department of the major. Courses may
not be double-counted toward this minor and the student's major or
other minors.
Research Experience
After completing two courses in this Minor, students may apply to
participate in a research program with the participation of the faculty
supervisor. Students will be chosen on the basis of their academic
record and appropriateness of the research project. Up to 10 students
will be selected each year. Students who are approved for this program
will receive 3 credit hours for the course ISA L65 400 Research
Experience in Institutional Analysis. Students will be expected to
devote at least 10 hours a week to this research.
Program Support
This particular program would be unable to exist and flourish without
the generous support and participation of Gary Hirsch. His continued
support has allowed
CNISS to fully implement its undergraduate research program for the
next few years. In addition, he has participated directly with CNISS as
an invited guest speaker as part of the CNISS Business Lecture Series.
We are grateful for his involvement with CNISS and for the model of
philanthropy he continues to provide.
Undergraduate Honors Theses

CNISS provides a forum for undergraduates pursuing honors in different
disciplines, including Economis, Political Science, and Anthropology,
to learn about related research being done across these disciplinary
boundaries. With faculty assistance, these students compete for funding
to help them along with their work on their honor theses. CNISS
organizes an annual conference of these students every spring break to
present their research. Below are the abstracts of the papers of prize
winners
from previous years (the prize is $250 per winner):
2004 Winner: Are General
Managers Generally
Wrong? A Study of Pay, Performance, and Win Shares in Major League
Baseball
Daniel Bikoff
This paper examines the relationship between player performance and
salary. It has been shown that most general managers do not use the
best system available
for gauging player performance, known as Win Shares, and this results
in a misallocation
of resources. If this has been occurring in the labor market of
baseball, which provides precise
statistical measurement, then this problem could be widespread in other
labor markets such as sports and education. Therefore the issue goes
beyond the baseball park. Baseball data from the 2002 and 2003 seasons
are used to test the hypothesis that the system general managers rely
on to measure
performance and value players converges to the Win Shares system as
player experience increases. The results suggest that this hypothesis
is incorrect, and that general managers do not improve their ability
to value players.
2004 Winner: Force and
Political Parties
Ari Blaut
Ari studied political parties' effect on presidential decisions to
threaten force
and political parties' potential signaling effects in international
situations. Ari, a 2004 graduate in Political Sciences, is currently a
law student at Georgetown School of Law.
2002 Winner: The Curious
Stability of the European Union: A Formal Model of Decision-Making in
the European Union
Paul S. Frederiksen
Where most social choice literature describes in great detail the
inherent instability of majority rule, existing models of
decision-making in the European Union (EU) suggest that the EU's treaty
base provides for a surprisingly stable political order. Not only does
the EU legislative process (practically) guarantee the existence of a
set of stable political outcomes - a core will exist - the set of
stable outcomes for which the legislature provides is quite substantial
- the core is generally very large. In this paper, I use social choice
theory and cooperative game theory to construct a formal,
two-dimensional spatial model that captures the stabilizing
institutional features of the EU legislative process. I demonstrate
that elements of bicameralism - found in the interaction between the
Council of Ministers and the European Parliament - coupled with a
unique type of executive agenda setter in the Commission help to
explain the EU's seemingly intrinsic stability. Moreover, I examine the
stabilizing properties of institutional features, such as the
separation between legislative institutions and the use of
supermajority voting rules. Using these components of the EU's
legislative apparatus, I show how the size of the core in the EU varies
with the application of the EU's four decision rules, consultation,
cooperation, co-decision, and assent. By implication, the model I
propose confirms other scholars' contentions that the EU has a heavy
status-quo bias, and it suggests a method for placing legislative
proposals in a policy space nad predicting their path through the
legislative game.
2001 Winner: The Political
and Economic History of Republican and Imperial Rome
Donald Cohn
A primary goal of social science remains understanding the origin and
evolution of stable and legitimate institutions. As nations across the
world struggle to achieve any version of the civil state and actors
reform existing institutions, the study of institution matters. To
properly understand and explain the dynamic history of a nation, theory
must show consistency with the empirical world. Although academic
literature contains institution by design theories that focus on
phenomenon like transaction costs, and social capital, few investigate
the role of individuals working within the constraints of institutions.
The bargained social contract theory endows government and relevant
players in a government with rational preference profiles and explains
the evolution of institutions as a complex political bargaining game.
This work examines the political and economic history of Republican and
Imperial Rome as a case study showing consistency between the bargained
social contract theory and the establishment and evolution of Roman
institutions.
2001 Winner: Mergers,
Innovation, and Schumpeterian Theory: A Study of Pharmaceutical Firms
Andrea Liapis
In 1950 Joseph Schumpeter argued in Capitalism, Socialism and
Democracy that large firms and imperfect competition promote
technological innovation. The pharmaceutical industry, the most
research intense in the world experienced major mergers in the 1980s
and 1990s. Is this market activity a manifestation of Schumpeter's
hypothesis that large firms are better equipped for technological
innovation? Through careful analysis of three mergers, this paper
concludes that, despite both real and proportionate increases in
funding for innovative activity, larger pharmaceutical firms are
inferior innovators and produce significantly less technological
output, consistent with the overall level of competition in the
industry.
|