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.

Shifts from direct implementation to advocacy-based programming have been documented across many non-governmental organisation (NGO) sectors, including animal welfare. Semi-structured interviews with 32 staff from different positions within animal welfare NGOs explored recent programming changes. Maintaining a balance between direct implementation and advocacy-based activities emerged as a strong theme. The findings suggest that risks are associated with both the direct implementation status quo and transitioning to an advocacy-based focus. Risks of the former include treating symptoms rather than root causes of welfare problems. Organisational change can be disruptive and necessitates realignment of core competences, in turn influencing NGO mission. Identified risks of transition include loss of individuals whose values fail to align with new programming directions, increased upwards accountability requirements for accessing institutional donors and difficulties when phasing out direct implementation approaches. Whilst having to be dynamic, NGOs need to evaluate the risks associated with programming decisions, considering their vision, mission and staff identity in order to ensure that welfare programming is as effective as possible.

Conditional cash transfers (CCTs) have become the main instrument to combat poverty in Latin America, they have been exported around the globe and are one of the most popular social policies of the twenty-first century. CCTs deliver cash transfers to poor families with conditionalities like attendance to school and health appointments. This article aims to explain the creation of CCTs. The research applies arguments from theories of social policy development to explain the formulation of the first two CCTs introduced in Brazil at the sub-national level and in Mexico at the national level during the mid-1990s. Findings show that the original formulation of CCTs can be explained by the emergence of a new policy paradigm based on a conceptualisation of the nature of poverty as lack of human capital among poor population, enabled by critical junctures created by the transitions to democratic regimes.

This paper analyzes the Peruvian highland tradition of Takanakuy, a public brawling ritual occurring each Christmas to resolve conflicts between local community members. We argue that Takanakuy provides an effective way for locals to resolve disputes that Peru's formal judicial system is unable or unwilling to settle. Using insights from ethnographic fieldwork, journalistic articles, reports, and academic sources, we find that brawling during Takanakuy encourages social cooperation by preventing potential violence and offering community members a credible mechanism of law enforcement in an orderly fashion with social acceptance.

This article analyzes the prospects for globalizing the varieties of capitalism (voc) debate. It identifies and compares firm-centered, governance-centered, and state-centered approaches to extending the debate on capitalist diversity, and discusses the distinctive contributions of each approach as well as the trade-offs between them. The author draws on three agenda-setting volumes that engage with the voc framework and study capitalist diversity in three regions not usually covered by this literature: Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, and East Central Europe. As these regions play an increasingly important role in the world economy, this article examines what the books imply about the current state of knowledge about global voc. The author argues that the extension of the voc debate to these parts of the world is important for advancing the understanding of economic institutions; the approach can reinvigorate research on capitalist diversity and the institutional foundations of economic development in the current era of globalization.