Sammenlign metoder

	Institutional Complementarity Analysis	Regulation Theory Analysis
Fagfelt	Political Economy	Political Economy
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Opprinnelsesår	2001	1979
Opphavsperson	Peter Hall & David Soskice; Masahiko Aoki; Bruno Amable	Michel Aglietta & Robert Boyer (French Regulation School)
Type	Comparative institutional analysis framework	Institutional-macroeconomic framework
Opprinnelig kilde	Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (Eds.). (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780199247752	Aglietta, M. (1979). A Theory of Capitalist Regulation: The US Experience. New Left Books / Verso. ISBN: 9781859842225
Alias	Institutional Complementarities, Complementarity Analysis, Coherence of Institutional Configurations	Regulation School Analysis, Theory of Regulation, Accumulation Regime Analysis, Parisian Regulation Approach
Relaterte	3	4
Sammendrag	Institutional complementarity analysis is a comparative-capitalism framework, central to the varieties-of-capitalism program of Peter Hall and David Soskice (2001) and to Masahiko Aoki's comparative institutional analysis (2001), for explaining why national economic models cohere into a small number of stable types rather than mixing institutions freely. Two institutions are complementary when the presence of one raises the returns to, or the efficiency of, the other — so that the value of any one arrangement depends on the configuration of the rest. Because complementary institutions reinforce each other, economies tend to settle into coherent clusters (such as coordinated and liberal market economies), and Bruno Amable (2003) extended the logic to a richer typology of five models defined across multiple institutional domains. The framework supplies the micro-logic behind both the coherence and the path dependence of national capitalisms.	Regulation theory analysis is an institutional-macroeconomic framework developed by the French Regulation School — above all by Michel Aglietta in A Theory of Capitalist Regulation (1979) and Robert Boyer in The Regulation School (1990) — to explain how capitalism, despite its inherent crisis tendencies, manages to reproduce itself and sustain growth for extended periods. Its central distinction is between a regime of accumulation (a stable macroeconomic pattern linking production, investment, and consumption) and a mode of regulation (the ensemble of institutional forms, norms, and habits that make that pattern cohere). When a regime of accumulation and a compatible mode of regulation lock together — as in postwar Fordism, where mass production was matched by mass consumption through a productivity-indexed wage — capitalism enjoys a long phase of stability. When the institutional forms can no longer contain the contradictions of the accumulation pattern, the framework diagnoses a structural crisis and a search for a new model, as in the crisis of Fordism and the transition toward post-Fordism.