This article revisits the methodological foundations of Elinor Ostrom’s institutionalism by examining the role of ‘complexity’ in her work and the conceptual influence of Herbert A. Simon. While Simon was not Ostrom’s most frequently cited reference, his thought – particularly as articulated in The Sciences of the Artificial – exerted a formative and enduring influence on her analytical framework. Drawing on Ostrom’s later writings, in which she offers a retrospective account of her intellectual trajectory, we show how Simon’s systems-engineering perspective provides a coherent framework for understanding her approach to institutional complexity, despite notable differences in their respective research objects and theoretical priorities. For Ostrom, institutions evolve incrementally as ‘boundedly’ rational individuals attempt to resolve collective problems through successive modifications of rule structures within complex social systems. In contrast to top-down optimisation models, her work emphasises adaptive responses and practical problem-solving. Interpreting Ostrom’s methodology through a Simonian lens not only deepens our understanding of her contribution to institutional economics but also illustrates the value of interdisciplinary approaches informed by complexity theory for the field.

This study sheds light on the diffusion of knowledge production as an institutional norm among central, development, and investment banks. It builds on an original database of 24,435 peer-reviewed scientific items published by a pool of 237 central banks, development banks, and investment banks from 1966 to 2023. The focus is on their interactive dynamics, analysed through a two-fold approach: Granger-Causality analysis for linear relationships and a multivariate Markov chain approach for non-linear interactions. Central banks emerge as leaders in scientific production, influencing development and investment banks. Results lead to further questions about inter-institutional agenda-setting, such as how central banks shape research priorities, the extent to which their intellectual leadership impacts others’ priorities, and the mechanisms through which institutional norms are diffused and reinforced within the global financial and policymaking landscape.

Our study investigates the impact of successful violent and non-violent revolutions on post-revolutionary institutions concerning women. Leveraging the Nonviolent and Violent Campaigns and Outcomes data on successful revolutions and the Varieties of Democracy dataset for gender-specific metrics, we employ fixed-effect difference-in-differences and Callaway Sant’Anna. Our results show positive effects from both treatments. Non-violent revolutions with regime change intentions have a more consistent positive impact on women’s empowerment indices than violent revolutions, while revolutions without regime change intentions show mixed or limited effects across both violent and non-violent cases.