THE STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONAL APPROACH

The structural-functional approach is derived from earlier uses of

functionalism and systems models in anthropology, sociology, biology, and
political science. Structural functionalism became popular around 1960
when it became clear that ways of studying U.S. and European politics
were not useful in studying newly independent countries, and that a new
approach was needed. Structural-functionalism assumes that a bounded
(nation-state) system exists, and studies structures in terms of their
function(s) within the system. For structural functionalists the question to be
answered is what does a structure (guerrilla movement, political party,
election, etc.) dowithin the political system (of country x)? The goal is to
find out what something actually does in a political system, as opposed to
what it is supposed to do. Thus, structural functionalists would not waste
time studying constitutions in Third World countries if they found that the
constitutions [structures] had little impact on political reality.
Almond claimed that certain political functions existed in all political
systems. On the input side he listed these functions as: political
socialization, political interest articulation, political interest
aggregation, and political communication. Listed as outputs were rulemaking, rule implementation, and rule adjudication. Other basic
functions of all political systems included the conversion process, basic
pattern maintenance, and various capabilities (distributive, symbolic, etc.).
Structural functionalists argued that all political systems, including Third
World systems, could most fruitfully be studied and compared on the basis
of how differing structures performed these functions in the various political
system.
Structural functionalism is based on a systems model. Conceptually,
the political process can be depicted as follows:

For analytical purposes the political system is considered to be the

nation-state, and the environment is composed of the interactions of
economic, social, and political variables and events, both domestic and
external. The idea is that there are a number of actors in the national
political system (political parties, bureaucracies, the military, etc.) and that
the actions of all these actors affect each other as well as the system. The
political analyst must determine the importance of these actors in a
particular political system. This is done by analyzing the functions
performed by the various actors. Any changes in the system also affect all
the actors. The feedback mechanisms allow for constantly changing inputs,
as actors react to outputs.
Structural functionalists, like systems analysts, have a bias toward
systemic equilibrium, (ie toward stability). Such a bias tends to make this
approach conservative, as stability, or evolutionary change, is preferred
[and more easily analyzed], to radical, or revolutionary change. A problem
which arises with this system-based model is that the nation-state's
boundaries are often permeable in the real world, rather than being the
neatly bounded nation-state conceptualized by structural functionalists. In
other words, in the real world it is usually difficult to state exactly what the
boundaries are, leading to some conceptual difficulties. For example, some
international actors are only intermittent, such as the U.S. when it
intervenes directly in Haitian or Panamanian politics. Should U.S. military
forces be considered a part of the Panamanian or Haitian political
systems?

STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONALISM AND HISTORICAL SEQUENCES OF

CRISES
The structural functional approach provides a useful framework for
categorizing and comparing data, but has been criticized as being
essentially static. It was not very useful for analyzing or predicting change;
the issue of why, how, when, and in what direction, political development
occurs. This issue of development, or change, is, of course, crucial for the
Third World.
In response to criticisms, structural functionalists looked at history and
concluded that political development takes place when an existing political
system is unable to cope with problems or challenges confronting it without
further structural differentiation or cultural secularization. Success at
meeting such challenges constitutes political development. By challenges,
Almond meant changes in the size, content, and frequency of inputs
(especially demands) for the system. For structural functionalists:
Political Development is defined as increased structural
differentiation and increased cultural secularization.
Structural functionalists argued that, historically, there have been four
major challenges to political systems, and that the challenges have
occurred in the following sequence (in the West).
1. penetration and integration (state-building)
2. loyalty and commitment (nation-building)
3. participation
4. distribution
(Perhaps a fifth, international penetration, should be added to the list.
The agents of international penetration would include: other nations,
international organizations, multinational corporations, prominent
individuals, ideological movements, guerrillas, militaries, and technological
sources such as radio broadcasts.)
In Europe the challenges occurred separately, and were handled one
at a time. Thus, the problem of state-building (road construction, tax
system, boundaries)) was usually solved before the problem of nationbuilding (transferring of primary political loyalty to the national ruler, and
away from the local or regional leader) became acute. The challenge of
participation was solved by the gradual extension of the vote and political
rights to non-propertied people, trade unionists, all males, and finally, to

women. The problem of distribution is still a challenge. The question of how

to divide up the goods of society has not yet been fully solved, although
there seems to be a movement in the direction of more equality in
distribution.
The Third World is experiencing a fundamentally different pattern of
challenge occurrence. In the Third World the challenges are occurring
simultaneously.
In many cases "solutions" to historic systemic challenges in the West
have been accompanied by violence and strong systemic resistance.
(Extension of participation rights to workers; U.S. Civil Rights movement of
1960s) In Third World nations all the challenges are occurring
simultaneously, and demands for solutions are putting severe pressure on
national political systems. From a structural functionalist point of view, the
amount of violence and instability sometimes observed in Third World
politics should, therefore, come as no surprise.

Structural functionalism

Structural functionalism

GA almond (Gabriel A.Almond Appear in the paragraph of a political culture theory) and
B and Powell (Bingham Powell,Jr.) point out three faults about the comparison politics of the
United States of the 1950's.
Regionalism (provincialism) that makes only great European power and the Soviet Union
research object
Description principle that doesn't intend construction of non-theoretical, general hypothesis
Formalism that doesn't take account to ideal way that actually functions seeing only public
side of system and procedure(formalism)
The almond invented a new concept "Political development (political development)" to
analyze the reality of the third world, and advocated "Structural functionalism (structural
functionalism)" as the analysis approach.

A lot of cases with the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia, and Latin America were
analyzed based on this epoch-making research program, and difficult work to construct the
general theory started. There was something that watched eyes in the development of the

comparison politics in the especially 1960-70's, and the comparison politics became the
center of the theory establishment in politics.

Structural functionalism captured the political system as [shi] no self-balance (homeostatic)

stem composed of interdepended element. Researchers paid attention to "Function" that
each structure accomplished at the same time as fixing the system configuration element
(various "Structure")"Function" here means working indispensable because balance arises in
the government and it is maintained. In the structural functionalism approach, it was thought
that various systems, standards, and value carried out the same function. In addition, the
diagram of finally achieving political development was assumed through "Modernization"
process of consisting of the development of the rise of the progress of economic
development and secularization and literacy rates and the bureaucracy etc. as for a
variously different at first system.

The study group of social science research council that the almond commanded (Social
Science Research Council) announced a theoretical empirical study based on structural
functionalism one after another for political development in countries that were called a third
world today. The fresh data were collected in various countries, and a new side related to
one national society such as [kurienterizumu] and the single-party system nations began to
be asked. The comparison of the flea between advanced nations was becoming the past
one.

The structural functionalism revolution brought a big reform to the accumulation method
and the analysis technique of data about the research of an advanced, industrial nations.
'The Civic Culture'('Present age citizens' cultural politicss') thereafter of the almond and [vaba] that analyzed general public's opinion in Britain, Italy, West Germany, and Mexico, the
public opinion poll that developed because of an American political research became general
also in the field of the comparison politics. Vote..preference..election..result..citizens..political
participation..ideal way..class..other..crack..serious..party identification..elite..general
public..sense of
values..differ..investigation..generalize..comparison..politics..action..research..establish..politi
cs..field..become.

R and Inglehart (Ronald Inglehart) who empirically clarified the appearance of

citizens'"Materialistic the escape" value in an advanced, industrial nations gave the
explanation to these gaining power the green movement in the country and declines of the
established party, etc.

Decline of structural functionalism

However, the shine was lost in [kisomonmi] [sareruyouninari] and the 1980's the 1970's.
The criticism that structural functionalism is too abstract to derive a verifiable hypothesis and
to test empirically has increased gradually in the United States. Especially, a liberal
character and the United States center of structural functionalism limit are clarified.

As for the political normalcy, not only the Britain-U.S. type system as described by the
almond but also the society's achieving it also with a coexistent multipole such as the
Netherlands where "Segmentation" had been done system became clear.

In addition, the assumption of the ..being assumed to be autonomous.. political

development theory of the political system became the object of the criticism, too. A
subordinate character has come to be recognized "Surrounding" of the political development
theory that is [tai] elephant ..it is ..main.... the political system in nations not autonomous but
advanced country economy. Democratic politics of just the birth fell into rule by the dictator
one after another in a lot of countries of the third world by the coup d'etat that happened one
after another. An optimistic expectation from a liberal standpoint of the political development
theory had been betrayed before the reality of the politics of these severe third worlds. SP
Huntington (Samuel P. Huntington) submitted the concept of a political decline, and
explained the importance of the system witnessing such a reality. Moreover, the totalitarian
regime that used a modern technology in the background of non-democratic ideology and
ruled the people was established, and the possibility of democracy looked like the force out
in communist countries (Friedrich and Brzezinski,1956).

Researchers in Europe had faced the limit of multi former principle assumption with nonhistory of structural functionalism that was the theory that had arisen in the United States.
The form of an ideal way and various systems of the interdependence between each
element that composed the political system was greatly different from the assumption of
structural functionalism from the United States though it differed from the political system for
the third world, and Europe political self-balance.

The height of order in Europe did not become possible by few of overlapping crack pattern
and national intervention. "Non-history" of the system theory was a contradictory one to
various "Historical inheritance" and the results for people in Europe.

Political System
Political system is the set of formal legal institutions that constitute a government or a
state. This is the definition adopted by many studies of the legal or constitutional

arrangements of advanced political orders. It is also called a system of politics and

government. It is usually compared to the legal system, economic system, cultural system,
and other social systems. It is different from them, and can be generally defined on a
spectrum from left, e.g. communism, to the right, e.g. fascism. However, this is a very
simplified view of a much more complex system of categories involving the views: who
should have authority, how religious questions should be handled, and what the government's
influence on its people and economy should be.
More broadly defined, however, the term comprehends actual as well as prescribed forms
of political behaviour, not only the legal organization of the state but also the reality of how
the state functions. Still more broadly defined, the political system is seen as a set of
processes of interaction or as a subsystem of the social system interacting with other
nonpolitical subsystems, such as the economic system
The discussion of political System is closely related to both Functionalism of
Gabriel Almond and System analysis of David Easton based on conception
of political phenomena as a system of interrelated and reciprocally regulated
patterns of actions and orientation, pattern that cluster together in equilibrium
and that have certain needs of maintenance and survival. Almond in his
functional approach, utilizes the concept of the political system instead of the
more traditional state, limited by its legal and institutional connotations.
Almond distinguishes the political system in terms of particular set of
interactional properties: comprehensiveness, interdependence, and
existence of boundaries. In the work of David Easton, However, the system
approach is most fully articulated.

Therefore, I shall discuss the political system based on two leading analyses
which were led by Gabriel Almond and by David Easton

A. Gabriel Almonds Analysis of Political System:

Gabriel Almond, the professor at Yale (19471950) and (19591963), Princeton
(19501959), and Stanford University (19631993) and the chair of the Social
Science Research Council's Committee on Comparative Politics has made a
"distinguished scholarly contribution" regarding the analysis of political System .
In his analysis, first he designed the characteristics of political system and then
outlined the functions of the system.

1 Characteristics of Political System:

As described by Almond in The Politics of Developing Areas, All political System

has four characteristics in common and in terms of which they may be
compared.

First of all, political systems, including the simplest ones, have political
structure (executive, judiciary and legislature e.t.c.).

Second, the same functions are performed in all political systems, even
though these functions may be performed with different frequencies, and
different kinds of structures.

Third, all political structure, no matter how specialized, whether it is found in

primitive or in modern societies, is multifunctional.

Fourth, all political systems are mixed systems in the cultural sense. There are
no all- modern cultures and structures, in the sense of rationality and no all
primitive ones, in the sense of traditionality. 1 All political systems, in this sense,
are transitional.

2. Functions of Political System:

Although Almond nowhere offers a specific definition of function, he postulates

seven functional requisites which must be fulfilled by any political system. On
the political or input side functions are:

1
2
3
4

Political Socialization and recruitment,

interest articulation,
Interest aggregation, and
Political communication

On the governmental or output side the other functions of political system

are:
1
2
3

Rule making,
Rule application and
Rule adjudication.

The functions are not of an equivalent nature, in that political communication is a

mechanism by which the other functions are performed- output as well as input,
not to mention feedback. All adequate analysis of a political system must locate
and characterize all of these functions and not simply these functions performed
by the specialized political structure. His functional categories were developed
for the purpose of comparing whole political systems- Western and nonwestern,
modern, transitional and traditional.

The functions are offered as a preliminary proposal and are modified in the
development of Almonds work. In Comparative Politics: A Developmental
Approach, Almond and Powell distinguished between three levels of functions,
described as activities3 . These levels are:

1
2

Capability functions (Regulative, extractive, distributive and responsive

functions determine the performance of the system in its environment) ;
Conversion Functions (Interest articulation, interest aggregation,
political communication , rule making, rule application and rule
adjudication are internal to the system and involve the input-output flow
as the system meets demands with authoritative decisions. );
System maintenance and adaptation functions, specifically political
socialization and recruitment.

The theory of political system will consist of the discovery of the relations
between these different levels of functioning- capabilities, conversion functions
and system maintenance and adaptation functions- and of the relation of the
functions at each level.

Functional analysis of political system has been criticized in many ways. Some
argues that it no more enables us to predict than it enables us to explain the
occurrence of a particular one of the items by which given functional
requirement met.4 According to some other critics, the key terms of functional
analysis are rarely given operational definitions and thus cannot be put to an
objective test.5 One of the most serious problems lies in the meaning of
maintenance, persistence or survival. In biology, as Hampel notes, survival of
an organism has a fairly clear meaning, but social systems are another matter
altogether.

B. David Eastons Analysis of Political System:

David Easton, a Canadian political scientist and a distinguished Research
Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of California,
provided the discipline's most widely used definition of politics and is renowned

for his application of systems theory to the study of political science. Easton
wishes to construct an empirically oriented general theory of politics and to that
end, he seeks to define the kinds of functions and characteristics of any political
system through a systematic framework for political analysis. He examines the
basic processes through which a political system, regardless of genetic and
specific type, is able to persist as a system of behavior in a world either of
stability and change.6

Eastons analysis rests on four premises:

1

System. It is useful to view political life as a system of behavior.

Environment. A system is distinguishable from the environment in which it exists

and open to influences from it

Response. Variations in the structures and processes within a system may usefully be
interpreted as constructive or positive alternative efforts by members of a system to
regulate or cope with stress flowing from environmental as well as internal sources.

Feedback. The Capacity of a system to persist in the face of stress is a function of the
presence and nature of the information and other influences that return to its actors
and decision makers.

According to Easton political systems have certain properties because they are systems.
These are:
1. Properties of Identification: To distinguish a political system from other social systems,
we must be able to identify it by describing its fundamental units and establishing the
boundaries that demarcate it from units outside the system.
a. Units of Political System: The units are the elements of which we say a system is
composed. In the case of political system, they are political actions. Normally it is useful to
look at these as they structure themselves in political roles and political groups.
b. Boundaries. Some of the most significant questions with regard to the operation of the
political systems can be answered only if we bear in mind the obvious fact that a system does
not exist in a vacuum. It is always immersed in a specific setting or environment. The way in
which a system works will be in a part a function of its response to the total social, biological
and physical environment. It is useful to conceive of a political system as having a boundary
in the same sense as a physical system. The boundary of a political system is defined by all
those actions more or less directly related to the making of binding decisions for a society;
every social actions that does not partake of this characteristic will be excluded from the
system and thereby will automatically be viewed as an external variable in the environment.
2. Inputs and Outputs. Presumably, if we select political system for special study, we do so
because we believe that they have characteristically important outputs. If one judged that

political systems did not have important outputs for society, we would probably not be
interested in them. Every state must have inputs to keep it going. Without inputs the system
can do no work; without outputs we can not identify the work done by the system.
Among inputs of a political system there are two basic kinds:
1. Demands and
2. Support
Demands have their birth in two sectors of experience: either in the environment of a system
or within the system itself. What do we mean by support? We can say that A supports B
either when A acts on behalf of or when he orients himself toward Bs goals, interests, and
actions. Support is fed into the political system in relation to three objects: the community,
the regime, and the government.
An output of a political system is a political decision or policy. Since the specific outputs of
a system are policy decisions, it is upon the government that the final responsibility falls for
matching or balancing outputs of a decision against input of demand.

References:

1. Gabriel A. Almond, Introduction: A Functional Approach to

Comparative Politics, in Gabriel A. Almond and James S.
Coleman, eds, The Politics of Developing Areas (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1960), p.11

2. Ibid, p 24

3. Gabriel Almond and Bingham Powell, Comparative Politics: A

Developmental Approach, p14.

4. Hampel, Logic of Functional Analysis, p.286.

5. Ibid, p 293.
6. David Easton, A Framework of Political Analysis, p x