This article briefly describes some of the intellectual challenges during the last half-century to the traditional fields of economics and political science: the public choice approach, the tragedy of the commons debate, the ‘new’ institutional economics, and behavioral game theory. Then, the components of a basic institutional analysis framework are presented that provide a general method for analyzing public economies and diverse forms of collective action. Empirical research related to metropolitan public economies, common-pool resources, and behavioral game theory is summarized that has contributed to the field of institutional analysis. The last section concludes that the macro foundations of institutional analysis appear firmer than the micro foundations related to the model of the individual to be used and discusses this puzzle.

Institutions affect economic outcomes, but variation in them cannot be directly linked to environmental factors such as geography, climate, or technological availabilities. Game theoretic approaches, based as they typically are on foraging only assumptions, do not provide an adequate foundation for understanding the intervening role of politics and ideology; nor does the view that culture and institutions are entirely socially constructed. Understanding what institutions are and how they influence behavior requires an approach that is in part biological, focusing on cognitive and behavioral adaptations for social interaction favored in the past by group selection. These adaptations, along with their effects on canalizing social learning, help to explain uniformities in political and social order, and are the bedrock upon which we build cultural and institutional variability.

This paper devises a simulation model that combines insights from the evolutionary perspective on the division of labor with ideas from the labor process literature. It characterizes technical change and the development of a near-decomposable production process as the outcome of technological search and of organizational problem solving, where the conflict between workers and firms over the organization of work plays a central role. It is argued that a near-decomposable organization of the production process also allows management to tighten its control over workers. Consequently, more extensive divisions of labor within a firm develop where the power of workers to oppose decisions by the management is low. In these scenarios the performance of firms is also highest. The model is used to interpret historical evidence about different development paths in technical change in the UK and the US at the beginning of the twentieth century.

Institutions influence and shape behaviour. This paper suggests one way in which they do so that has been largely overlooked in institutional analysis and design. When faced with a decision or problem, people have more than one mechanism at their disposition for addressing it. The human mind offers multiple tools, ranging from conscious deliberation to spontaneous, affective reactions. Relying on technology or experts, decision-makers can also muster additional resources. Often, the meta-choice of which decision-making or problem-solving mode is used has an impact on the output. Some normative goals are more likely met if the decision-maker uses a specific problem-solving mode. We argue that the meta-choice of which problem-solving mode to use for a given decision can be influenced by institutions. In the interest of defining access points for institutions, we develop a conceptual framework for the selection and implementation of decision-making and problem-solving modes.

Bruce Caldwell's Hayek's Challenge should be welcomed as the first serious book on one of the most important thinkers of the twentieth century. However, this review begins by pointing out a number of curious omissions and silences concerning Hayek's career in the book. We propose that the key to understanding the turns and reversals in his thought lay in his politics, and not as Caldwell has it, in some abstract philosophical doctrines. Central to that thesis is Hayek's fostering the development of Neoliberalism through such institutional structures as the Mont Pèlerin Society.