Gabriel A. Almond, a famous American political scientist, gained recognition for his innovative work in comparative politics, political development, and political culture. In the 1950s, Almond brought about a revolution in the field of political science by integrating research methods from sociology, psychology, and anthropology. While he initially concentrated on foreign policy, his areas of study expanded to include thorough examinations of comparative political development and culture.
Almond conducted research on diverse topics including the politics of developing countries, Communism, and religious fundamentalism. It is crucial to recognize that many of Almond’s ideas were influenced by Easton’s system’s theory. Almond employed a comparable typology in his ‘structural functionalism’. The introduction of a new approach by Easton and other comparative political scientists involved using the political system as a basis and examining various concepts linked to structure and function.
Almond introduced new terms such as ‘structure’ and ‘functional’ to develop the concept of Structural Functional Analysis in the political system. He proposed that a thorough understanding of a political system requires examining both institutions or structures and their functions. Additionally, Almond emphasized the importance of studying institutions in their dynamic and historical contexts, as similar structures can perform essential functions in different settings.
The ideas presented here strongly differed from the prevailing systems approach by David Easton in 1953. Easton’s approach included state-society theory and dependency theory, both of which viewed political systems as essentially identical, governed by the same laws of “stimulus and response” (inputs and outputs), without considering the unique context of each system. In contrast, Almond’s 2007 structural-functional approach only acknowledged context to a certain extent as it neglected the significance of culture, which offered opportunities for independent thinking.
According to Almond (year), a political system has two primary types of functions. The first type comprises four “input” functions: recruitment and socialization, communication, interest articulation, and interest aggregation. Interest articulation, considered the most significant function, involves “demands” as defined by Easton (1953). These demands encompass various issues like calls for higher wages, fixed working hours, accessible educational facilities, provision of recreational amenities, well-maintained roads, and enforcement of law and order. The remaining three functions fall under the “output” category: rule-making, rule application,and rule adjudication. These functions essentially correspond to the legislative, executive,and judicial branches of government. Additionally, Almond and Powell (1966) classify functions into three types: capability functions, conversion functions,and communication functions.
The functions of capability encompass several aspects. These include extraction, which involves obtaining taxes and obedience; regulation, which entails the enforcement of law and order; distribution, which refers to the allocation of goods and services; symbolism, which promotes love for national symbols like the flag and anthem; and responsiveness, which is perceived as being responsive to citizens.
The capability functions, which include interest articulation, interest aggregation, and conversion functions, play a crucial role in how a political system conducts transactions between its domestic and foreign environments. These conversion functions are referred to as such because they convert inputs from the environments into outputs within the environments. Similarly, the communication functions, also known as socialization, recruitment, and communication functions, are sometimes called “developmental” processes.
According to Cammack (1998), for a political system to function effectively and maintain clear boundaries between the government and society, it must have a mechanism in place to prevent an overwhelming influx of unregulated claims or demands from citizens. This requires the selection, routing, and management of citizen demands.
It is essential to avoid a sudden flood of various claims from the public, as it may overwhelm the political system with societal pressures. To prevent this situation, specific types of institutions should be in place. These include associational interest groups, secular and pragmatic political parties, and free and neutral mass media, similar to those found in the U.S.
An ideal political system uses unregimented and differentiated structures for interest articulation, including political parties that are not overly politicized or tied to specific ideologies or interests. These institutions do not monopolize interest articulation but assist in regulating it. The presence of a free and impartial mass media also helps to regulate those in power. With autonomous structures regulating interest articulation, the political system gains more control over enforcing overall boundaries and enabling the fusion of modern and traditional cultures. This involves penetrating traditional styles of diffuseness, particularism, ascription, and affectivity with more rational styles of specificity, universalism, achievement, and affective neutrality.
To put it simply, a political system that is functioning perfectly would undergo modernization, not due to direct government intervention, but through the process of promoting increased autonomy and rationality within its subsystems. The author also categorized their theories into two groups: Input and Output. The Input category encompasses five specific areas: Political recruitment and socialization, Political communication, Interest aggregation, and Interest articulation. One crucial aspect is Political recruitment and socialization, as every society must introduce new members to the political culture in order to maintain the required set of attitudes for the system’s survival.
Both overt and covert methods are utilized for socializing individuals into a particular culture. Covert socialization involves fostering non-political attitudes as a natural part of the process, but it is never flawless and carries some degree of risk. On the other hand, recruitment is a more direct approach that entails hiring and training individuals for specific roles. Both Western and non-Western political systems are required to carry out both political recruitment and socialization functions. Families, schools, political parties, and the media play important roles in this process.
In terms of political communication, all functions rely on effective communication, with content being more significant than the form utilized. In modern systems, the media have established ethical codes that promote neutrality, enabling them to function independently from other modes of communication. A free flow of information from society to politics and between different political structures is crucial along with an open feedback mechanism. According to Almond (2007), examining the political communication in various countries allows for effective comparisons of their political systems. The primary actors involved in this aspect are mass media outlets, interest groups,and political parties.
Interest articulation involves the proper formulation and expression of demands for political action, which usually occurs at the boundaries of different subsystems. These structures also serve as environmental boundaries, separating the polity from society. According to Almond, there are four main types of interest articulation structures: institutional interest groups (such as legislatures, political executives, bureaucrats, armies, and churches), non-associational interest groups, anomic interest groups, and associational groups.
Non-associational interest groups, such as kinship and lineage groups, ethnic, regional, religious, status, and class groups, often only perform the articulation function intermittently or sporadically. Anomic interest groups are also sporadic and explosive in nature as they seek to press their demands through riots or demonstrations. Additionally, there are associational groups, which are considered the best kind. These groups feature specialized structures like trade unions, business and professional associations, civic associations, and educational associations.
If groups do not have opportunities to express their interests and needs openly, their demands will remain unmet and could lead to violent outbreaks that may need to be controlled by those in power. The way in which these demands are expressed can either reduce or worsen an existing conflict. According to Almond et al (2007), interest aggregation is crucial in converting these demands into policy options, with political parties typically fulfilling this role. However, in certain cases, other entities such as the legislature, bureaucracy, mass media, and civic interest groups may also perform this aggregation function.
The bureaucracy frequently includes individuals who have expertise in developing the necessary regulatory codes to expand upon a general policy, limited by the amount of interpretation granted to the bureaucracy. There are three classifications of output: rule making, rule application, and rule adjudication. Rule making is sometimes referred to as legislation in certain countries; however, rules must be created according to specific procedures by designated institutions with particular limitations.
The interaction of individuals in creating rules, known as the legislature (Almond et al 2007), is crucial. These rules are designed to be enforced, and it is the duty of the bureaucracy to carry out this enforcement. The existence of a bureaucracy is essential for contemporary governance. However, there must also be a central authority that makes decisions in order to counterbalance the inclination towards inertia and decentralization. The utilization of well-organized systems for applying rules significantly improves a political system’s capacity to influence its surroundings.
The executive, also known as the RULE ADJUDICATION, is responsible for interpreting laws and determining guilt or innocence. A functioning and independent judiciary is vital for resolving conflicts among citizens, based on a set of established rules that have been applied to past societal conflicts. Nevertheless, Almond’s structural functionalism has faced criticism including conservative ideological bias and a preference for maintaining the status quo, a lack of methodological clarity, and an inability to address social change. References include Almond and Powell’s “Comparative politics: A developmental approach” (1966), Almond, Powell, Dalton, and Strom’s “Comparative politics today, 9e” (2007), Cammack’s “Capitalism and democracy in the third world” (1998), and Easton’s “The political system” (1953).
