Page 98 - kpi17073

Balanced Institutional Reform

Dr. Allen Hicken*

Given the political reform currently under way in Thailand the
theme of this year’s KPI Congress is a timely one. Balance is what all
good reformers seek to achieve. A balance between competing ideas
and interests. Between pragmatism and optimism. Between the status
quo and change. Between appreciation of the past and aspirations for
the future. This is a herculean task to which reformers bring a limited
set of tools. We cannot reshape culture. We cannot undo the past.
We cannot force opponents to see eye-to-eye. We have no power to
imbue all public officials with a moral heart and incorruptible soul. We
cannot change human nature.

The major tool that reformers can wield is institutional reform.
Institutional reform, to be sure, can be a clumsy and inefficient tools—
it is often more like a rock than a scalpel. And yet, we know that
institutions have the power to profoundly shape the incentives and
power of voters, politicians and bureaucrats. And so, we attempt to
wield this tool, imperfect and imprecise as it is.

But institutional reform itself is a balancing act. For example, in
institutional design there is generally a trade-off between majoritarian
versus proportional democracy, and between responsiveness to local
versus national interests. Reforms cannot do everything and careful
consideration on how to balance these trade-offs in needed.
Institutional reforms work best when they are carefully calibrated to
work together, and when they are in balance with existing institutions,
norms, and cultures. This is not an easy process, nor is it an exact
science. Still, we know a lot about how particular institutional reforms
behave in isolation, and in conjunction with other institutions.

* University of Michigan