ADVERTISEMENTS:
Though Almond and Powell have given more attention to structures and culture, yet their basic approach is functionist. Functionalism thinks of social structures and roles as performing functions in the system.
A system can be analysed at three levels:
(i) System maintenance and adaptation level,
(ii) Conversion level, and
(iii) Capability level.
The analysis can explain its operations, process of change, and factors operating underline the change. In a way it speaks about the whole theory of political change. At these levels, political systems can be fruitfully compared which can further explain and validate interrelations among these levels. All these levels are specific aspects of systemic functioning. The basic operation of the system is conversion-function. Through it, the system attains its capability to maintain and adapt itself and reach its goals. However, we can begin with any one of the three processes.
i. System Maintenance and Adaptation Level:
At this level, conversion functions are seen from the view of maintenance of the system and its adaptation with the environment. This is done through recruitment and socialisation processes. All of them operate through structures. Structures are patterns of observable activities. They are made of roles. The political role is one of the basic units of a political system. Sets or roles are called as structures. Interrelated roles and structures together make up a subsystem.
Role, structures, and subsystems of various systems may differ:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(i) To the extent of their differentiation or specialisation, and
(ii) On the basis of their quantum of independence or subordination to each other.
Differentiation refers to the processes in which ‘new type of roles and structures are recreated and adapted to the old’. It is a process by which roles change and become more specialised or more independent. Sometimes new roles are established, or new structures and subsystems emerge or are created. Political recruitment is the process by which the roles of political systems are filled. It may be on the basis of general or specific principles, by election, nomination, hereditary, or otherwise.
Structural differentiation, independence of roles and structures, and their capabilities are interrelated specialised role, if autonomous, result in better performance. Relationship between roles and structures is, therefore important. Autonomous roles happen to be more responsive. Controlled or directed roles are often inefficient, ineffective, and apathetic.
Political culture is the psychological dimension of the political system. It consists of attitudes, beliefs, values, and skills prevailing at a particular time or imbibed by bulk of population. However, there can be many patterns of culture or sub-cultures, related to region, class, language, or historical background. Culture to a large extent motivates the roles, structures, and subsystems, and therefore, influences the whole system. It can accelerate or obstruct the process of role-differentiation and independence. Political culture is maintained and changed through the process of political socialisation.
It is a process by which political attitudes and values are learned by individuals. Through the function of political socialisation, individuals are brought into a particular political culture. As there are many sub-cultures and means and methods to realise them, it may take many forms.
Rational political socialisation leads to secularisation or secular culture. Secularisation is a process by which individuals increasingly become rational, analytical and experienced in their working and behaviour. Traditional or parochial attitudes, beliefs and habits are substituted by rational ones. Thus, through socialisation process, political culture is maintained as well as changed, and the latter ultimately influences the working of structures and therefore, the system as a whole.
Political recruitment is another important function. It is a process whereby the roles of political systems are filled. It may be on the basis of general or specific principles, by election, nomination, hereditary, or otherwise. Political systems recruit individuals into political roles. Structures function through roles.
Recruitment function cannot be separated from socialisation process. Recruitment inducts individuals with different cultures, interests, attitudes, and values. The background of these people has a great impact on the performance of their roles. Therefore, their socialisation into appropriate political culture becomes an urgent task for every political system.
However, it is clear that political systems maintain themselves by recruiting roles into their structures, and socialise them into some pattern of political culture. They adapt themselves by making changes or modifications in the recruitment as well as socialisation functions, which ultimately influence its political culture. Secularisation of political culture leads to structural differentiation, and autonomy of roles, and both of them result in responsiveness and efficiency of the whole political system.
Performance of structures, to a large extent, is related to political culture which operates them through socialisation and recruitment functions. At this level, the system gets its (see diagram) material to tread on the path of attaining capability, and lead to further development.
ii. Conversion Level:
Almond, while making use of Easton’s input-output model, improves it further as input-conversion-output model. His focus is on conversion process, which transforms inputs as outputs. It responds to the question ‘what does a political system do for maintaining itself?’ Inputs and outputs mostly relate to environment, but their transformation-process is an inside matter. As functions are performed by and within structures, the inputs and outputs are also operated through their structures.
Almond has classified conversion functions into six categories:
1. Interest articulation.
2. Interest aggregation through political parties, bureaucracy, etc. in form of policy proposals.
3. Rule-making by transformation of policy-proposals for the purpose of implementation.
4. Rule application by political and permanent executive.
5. Rule adjudication by specific structures like judiciary.
6. Communication function.
The first two functions are ‘political’ inputs and the next three are ‘governmental’ outputs. Political socialisation and recruitment has now been considered as a separate level of analysis. It has been set apart to explain the ‘why’ of systematic behaviour. Communication function has also been accorded a higher role, and dealt with separately. In fact, it conjoins all the levels and involves all functions.
Conversion functions cannot be performed without communication. It is a meeting ground of all functions. Almond, therefore, has found it difficult to put communication functions exclusively under any particular level.
The conversion process is internal to the system and is a continuum:
(1) Demands are formulated,
(2) Demands are combined in the form of alternative courses of action,
(3) Authoritative rules are formulated,
(4) These rules are applied and implemented,
(5) In case of dispute, rules are determined by law in individual cases, and
(6) There is constant communication within and outside the system. These categories provide the basis of comparing various political systems also.
iii. Capability Level:
At this level, the political system is observed as a ‘person’ or entity acting in its domestic and international environments. The political system consists of interacting roles, structures, and subsystems, and of underlying psychological inclinations which affect these interactions. As a process, it converts inputs taking from the environment or from within the system into outputs, which are sent into the environment thereby changing it, and in the process, the political system also changes. Capability analysis describes its entire performance in the environment.
It involves five aspects:
(1) Extractive capability,
(2) Regulative capability,
(3) Distributive capability,
(4) Symbolic capability, and
(5) Responsive capability.
Extractive capability represents the extent of material and human resources to which the political system can draw out from the environment – domestic and international. This provides the basis for other capabilities to become more effective. It is similar to Easton’s concept of support. There is difference between actual and potential extractive capability. There can be many ways to procure extractions: force, patriotic appeals, incentives, rewards, etc. It is always important to look for who provides support, why and to what extent.
Regulative capability refers to the exercise of control over the behaviour of individuals and groups. It is done on the basis of legitimate physical force. Its actual use shows decreasing politically of the system. One has constantly to investigate what individuals and groups, in what areas of life, and with what frequency or intensity, need the actual employment of legitimate force. Often mere threat to use it or demonstration of that threat becomes operative. Both regulative and extractive capabilities are interdependent. In the absence of proper balance, one can result in destroying the other. Regulation requires resources and vice versa.
Distributive capability involves provision of services, goods, statutes, and other facilities to the individuals and groups. Distribution can be considered on the basis of variety, areas, quality, quantity, segments of population benefitted by it, impact, and cost involved. Distribution has to keep some relationships with extraction and regulation.
Symbolic capability is the rate of effective symbol flow from the political system into the society and the international environment.'” It includes statement of values and policies, display of flag and forces, visits by leaders, celebration of functions and festivals, etc. Cost of these symbolic expressions is small but they are effective when respond to popular attitudes, beliefs, values, expectations, and situations. Both distributive and symbolic capabilities can support and reinforce one another, making up for mutual deficiencies. The last responsive capability relate to the relationship between inputs and outputs.
Much depends on the responsiveness of the system to handle various demands, pressures, and crises. The system as a whole, or its parts or the elite can display its activeness to respond. There can be structures and processes to channelise the inputs in an efficient manner. If the structures and subsystems are autonomous, responses to demands and pressures become, more or less, automatic. Sometimes they have to be immediately met with, and any delay can cause immense harm to the system itself.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
There is interrelationship between these capabilities. Dictatorial systems are more extractive and regulative, and less distributive. Communist systems are more distributive, but also extractive and regulative. Democracies are highly responsive and distributive. Their regulative and extractive capabilities remain subordinate to them. Capability analysis, thus, speaks about the flow of activity into and out of the political system, telling how is it performing in the environment, shaping it, and being shaped by it further.
The analysis also enables us to classify and compare political systems on the basis of these capabilities and their indicators. For example, distributive analysis would spell out which system is allocating what items to which sectors and with what effect. Performance of capabilities explains the phenomenon of political change or development. It can come about from elites, social groups, or international environment.
Change coming from any one of these sources causes change in the flow and conversion process of inputs and outputs. Everything depends on system’s capabilities to deal with inflow of inputs, their conversion and effect of outputs, and understanding them all with the help of its communication network. Outputs influence inputs or domestic as well as international environment. Capability analysis deals with system’s role to change its environment as well as getting changed by it.
Political systems interact both with their domestic societies as well as political systems operating in the international environment. Their performance at that level can be analysed through capability analysis. It is input-conversion-output process seen from the international angle. There is some relationship between the pattern of domestic capability and pattern of international capability. Various patterns can be analysed, discovered, and compared.
Factors affecting capability of a system are: political elites material and human resources, organisational apparatus, and the level of support. All can be, more or less, improved upon. Capability analysis can also tell us a lot about the path of development. Adequate extraction and regulation capabilities enable a system to distribute resources. Structural differentiation and secularisation increase the former capabilities. It can also suggest several possibilities of dealing with a crisis – increase or decrease its distributive and symbolic activities, restructure its conversion system, or actualize its potential capabilities.