their change boundaries can reverberate throughout other institutions in society, shaping
their relations and the overall degree of institutionalization of the values that a society is
founded on. Boundaries transmit social values and roles to institutional and societal
actors and individuals. For these reasons, we think that more attention needs to be paid to
the boundaries of institutions. Without understanding how these borders come into being
and what the consequences of their creation and alteration are, we are likely to miss how
the nature of a boundary or its change can ripple through society, potentially producing
major institutional as well as societal change.
An important focus of future research is the ways in which boundaries can vary
and the consequences of that variance. We suggest that the variance in the permeability
of boundaries is particularly worthy of further research for three reasons. The porosity of
an institution’s boundaries is likely to have significant impact not only on relations within
and between institutions, but on the overall pattern of power and authority within society.
This is because porosity determines which actors have power and influence within and
across institutions. Second, the permeability of boundaries determines the likelihood of
political struggles over those boundaries and therefore the likelihood of institutional
change. Third, as a consequence, permeable boundaries are more likely to be associated
with fundamental transformation of the values underpinning society. We suggest that the
tools of historical institutional and constructivist analysis are particularly appropriate for
understanding when and how boundaries come into being, how they facilitate collective
action among like and unlike actors, and more broadly for understanding both
institutional and social change.
33
Convention