oru.sePublikationer
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Aktörer och strukturer inom svenska statsvetenskap: En granskning av tre statsvetenskapliga bidrag till aktör - strukturdebatten
Örebro University, Department of Social and Political Sciences.
2008 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this essay is to critically review three different contributions to the agency – structure debate from a political science perspective. My opinon is that the agency – structure debate is one of the main problems within the social science. The theories which I will examine are Lennart Berntsons theory from 1974, Lennart Lundquists from 1984 and Walter Carlsnaes from 1992. These political scientists all have different perspectives to the problem. My aim is to compare three theories that is of importance to the problem. But I also want to show that there are problems with each of these theories. No one really solves the problem. I want to shed some light on the different problems which these theories encounter and I also want to show were the solution to these problems might be found.

It is obvious that the theories have a similar view on the actor (or agent). Each see the actor as both an individual and a collective, such as a party, state or an organisation. They also see the actor in a constant relation to the society. The two main differences between the theories is when it comes to defining the structures and when it comes to trying to connecting the actor with the structure. Berntson sees the connection as mainly classoriented and this provides valuable knowledge to the debate. However, compared to Berntson, Lundquists theory is more thoroughly worked out when it comes to providing knowledge to how agents are affected by structures. This, I would say, is the biggest advantage with Lundquists theory. Finally, Carlsnaes theory, compared to both Berntson and Lundquist, is the least developed one, at least when it comes to defining both the actor and the structure. Though, I still consider his theory of importance. This is because his contribution to the knowledge on how we might explain structural change.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. , 54 p.
Keyword [en]
agency, actor, structure, political science
Keyword [sv]
aktör - struktur, aktör, statsvetenskap, statskunskap, struktur, Berntson, Lundquist, Carlsnaes
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalization Studies)
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-2143ISRN: ORU-SAM/STK-C--08/0048--SEOAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-2143DiVA: diva2:135931
Uppsok
samhälle/juridik
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2008-05-21 Created: 2008-05-21

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(385 kB)1540 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 385 kBChecksum MD5
1217539bea91d61bc4ae095992edb6e4541caac3d846f24fa807b71cce7dd1e491cf97ea
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Social and Political Sciences
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalization Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1540 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 2565 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf