INSTITUTIONAL INERTIA AND POLITICAL IMPETUS IN FRANCE AND BRITAIN *

The concern with immobilism or stalemate in France and Britain is analysed in terms of the concept of institutional inertia, defined as structural overinstitutionalisation and processual pluralism and incrementalism. Examples from economic policy indicate that French governments, relying principally on the techno‐bureaucracy, have a greater innovative capacity than British governments, relying primarily on the major interest groups. That this is so even when the French governments are Right‐wing and the British governments are Left‐wing suggests the operation of culturally‐based dominant values that inhibit or preclude some kinds of government action and favour others. Though the political factor may not be of decisive importance in determining whether a country experiences economic “success”, it is pivotal in explaining how countries cope with economic “failure”. A comparison between the relative capacity of France and Britain to mobilise consent and to overcome dissent indicates that French étatisme has worked more successfully than British tripartite power sharing between government, business and labour organisations. A reforming impetus coming from a French government is less likely to be impeded and more likely to be furthered by interest groups (pressured rather than pressure groups) than is the case in Britain. The culturally‐determined addiction to crisis‐avoidance characteristic of Britain has prevented the emergence of “new men” and encouraged a foredoomed reliance on salvation through attempted imitations of French institutions such as national planning or the ENA.