EVOLUTION AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION TOWARD A NEW LEVEL OF SOCIOPOLITICAL INTEGRATION

Transcription

1 EVOLUTION AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION TOWARD A NEW LEVEL OF SOCIOPOLITICAL INTEGRATION

2 Studien zur Regierungslehre und Internationalen Politik llerausgegeben von Klaus von Beyme, Giinther Doeker, Dieter Grosser, Winfried Steffani v Volker Ri ttberger Evolution and International Organization Toward a New Level of Sociopolitical Integration

3 Studien zur Regierungslehre und Intemationalen Politik Evolution and International Organization Toward a New Level of Sociopolitical Integration Volker Rittberger University of Tiibingen Den Haag, Martinus Nijhoff

4 To Robert C. North 1973 by Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands. All rights reserved, including the right to translate or to reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form. lsbn-13: e-1sbn-13: : /

5 Acknowledgments This study is a slightly revised version of the author's dissertation submitted to the Department of Political Science, Stanford University, in late The special encouragement which the author received form his principal adviser, Professor Robert C. North, is gratefully acknowledged. It is as a tribute to his stimulating scholarship that I dedicate this volume to him. The dissertation research was supported by a grant from the International Peace Research Program funded by the Ford Foundation and administered by the National Academy of Sciences, Division of Behavioral Sciences, Washington, D.C. The use of the Stanford University Computation Facility was made possible through a special grant by the Department of Political Science. Miss Kathy Foote ably assisted the author in collecting the data on which the empirical parts of this study are based. Professor Klaus Jiirgen Gantzel, Frankfurt a.m., kindly commented on the manuscript and made several helpful suggestions. The author feels heavily indebted to the aforementioned individuals and institutions; none of them, however, should be held responsible for the contents of this study. v

6 CONTENTS Acknowledgments. List of tables List of figures Chapter I: Introduction: Problems of Theory-Building in the Study ofinternational Organization Page V IX XI I 1.1 Development of Research and Its Inadequacies I 1.2 The Quest for New Directions in Theory Building 3 Chapter 2: Sociocultural Evolution and Sociopolitical Organization Research on the Changing Scale of Sociopolitical Organization Sociocultural Evolution - General and Specific Aspects Evolution of Sociopolitical Organization Analysis of the Evolutionary Process Chapter 3: The International Organization Level of Integration and Its Relationship to the Nation State Structural Means ofintegration at the International Organization Level Interrelations Among Structural Dimensions of International Organization-Building and Patterns of Growth International Organization and the Nation-State System.. 44 Chapter 4: Industrial Civilization and the Causes of International Organization-Building Theoretical Analysis Empirical Domain and the Operationalization of Variables Data Analysis VII

7 Contents Page Chapter 5: International Organization-Building and Integration Within the Global Context The Dependent Variable: International Integration 5.2 Three Theories of International Integration. 5.3 Data Analysis..... Chapter 6: Summary and Conclusions. Bibliography Appendix. Index VIII

8 List of Tables Table Page 2.1 Median Population Size of Communities and Societies, by Level of Technology Number of IGO's, Simple and Weighted IGO Nation Memberships, " Budgetary Expenditures of the U.N. System and Its Predecessor Organizations and Derived Measures, Number ofngo's and of Newly Founded NGO's Value of Exports as a Percentage of National Income, Developed and Underdeveloped Countries: / Interrelations Among Measures of the Bureaucratic Dimension of International Organization-Building Relations Between Bureaucratic and Sodality Dimensions of International Organization-Building Correlation Between U.N. System Expenditures/National Government Expenditures and Time (Product-Moment Correlation Coefficients) Correlates of International Organization-Building, Summary of Variables, Indicators, and Measures a Correlates of International Organization-Building (U.N. System): Industrial Technology, (Ten-Year Time Lag) b Correlates of International Organization-Building (Specialized Agencies): Industrial Technology, (Ten-Year Time Lag) a Crosstabulation of Percentage of Labor Force in Non-Agricultural Occupations with IGO-Memberships, 1965/ b Crosstabulation of Percentage of Labor Force in Non-Agricultural Occupations with NGO-Memberships, 1965/66 69 IX

9 List of Tables 4.4a Correlates ofinternational Organization-Building (U.N. System): Higher Education, I865-I965 (Five-Year Time Lag) b Correlates of International Organization-Building (Specialized Agencies): Higher Education, I865-I965 (Five-Year Time Lag) I 4.5 Correlates ofinternational Organization-Building: Termination of International Wars, I865-I Correlates of International Organization-Building: Cooperative Experience during Previous Time Period, I865-I a Correlates of International Organization-Building (U.N. SystEm): Path Coefficients of Regression Equations b Correlates of International Organization-Building (Specialized Agencies): Path Coefficients of Regression Equations I International Organization-Building and the Onset ofinternational War, I865-I Zero-Order Correlations Between Measures of International Organization-Building, Expansion of International System Membership, and Frequency of All International Wars, Zero-Order Correlations Between International Organization-Building, Spread of Industrial Civilization, and Magnitude of All International Wars, I865-I x

10 List of Figures Figure 2.1 Taxonomy of Stages of Sociocultural Evolution Page Stages of Sociopolitical Organization (Adapted from Marshall Sahlins) Relationships Between Technology, Sociopolitical Organization, and Ideology U.N. System Expenditures/National Government Expenditures (A), U.N. System Expenditures/National Defense Expenditures (B) in Five- Year Intervals (Data from Table 3.2) Simple and Weighted IGO Nation Memberships in Five-Year Intervals (Data from Table 3.1) Curve-Fitting for U.N. System Expenditures/National Government Expenditures Simplified Structure of Multiple Authority Centers Model of World Politics Correlates of International Organization-Building a Correlates of International Organization-Building (U.N. System): Important Linkages b Correlates of International Organization-Building (Specialized Agencies): Important Linkages Relationship Between International Organization-Building and Frequency of All International Wars with Expansion of International System Membership as Intervening Variable Relationship Between International Organization-Building and the Magnitude of All International Wars Controlled for Advance of Industrial Civilization XI

11 Chapter I: Introduction: Problems of Theory-Building in the Study of International Organization The recent past has witnessed efforts by several eminent scholars to take stock of accomplishments and failures in the scientific study of international organization. A conunon note struck by these writers has been the regret over the relative retardation of international organization research in terms of theoretical and methodological sophistication. This backwardness can be attributed - not exclusively, but largely - to the continuing strong representation of legalistically oriented scholars in this field of inquiry. Yet, at the same time, the appearance, in rapid succession, of a series of review articles surveying the historical development and present condition of the study of international organization indicates that an increasing number of intf-rnational organization scholars have recognized the inadequacies of their discipline, and that they are groping for new ways to catch up with the advances made in the social sciences in general. l 1.1. Development of Research and Its Inadequacies In his survey of the pertinent literature on international organization Louis Solm (1968) distinguishes four periods of scholarly development ranging from pre-world War I times to the mid-1960's. Ronald Yalem (1966), neglecting the separate identity of pre-world War I scholarly work, suggests five phases in the study of international organization between 1920 and However, these periodizations can be modified to coincide with those commonly applied to the study of international politics in general. 2 The first phase of scholarly interest in international organization included the years immediately prior tc World War I and most of the inter-war period (Sohn's periods I and II and Yalem's period I). During this time, two categories of works existed side by side. On the one hand, we fmd a literature 'more programmatic than descriptive in character. The books in this category did not portray any existing organizations but were directed toward the need for an international organization to maintain peace in the world and outlined the possible structure of such organizations' (Sohn, 1968: 251). On the other hand, there were the studies which analyzed the legal and formal-institutional aspects of extant international organizations, notably the League of Nations and what were then called the International Public Unions, predecessors of the U.N. Specialized Agencies. Yalem notes specifically that this literature 'reflected an excessive optimism in the ability of international organizations to control international conflict' and that it 'largely neglected the influence of political factors such as power politics on international cooperation' (1966: I). I

12 Introductiotl Phase two spanned the time from the late 1930'S to about 1950 (Sohn's period III and Yalem's periods II and III). The literature produced during these years revealed an ambivalent reaction toward the apparent inability of international organizations, particularly the League of Nations, to control violence or contribute to the solution of conflicts among major powers. The advocates of a world state saw vindicated their position that an even stronger universal supranational authority was required to assure the repression or deterrence of international aggression. However, the 'realist' position, laying claim to greater scientific validity, argued 'the importance of political and ideological conflicts as barriers to international cooperation' (Yalem, 1966: 2). The excellent analysis by Ronald Rogowski (1968) shows how the twin positions of 'idealism' and 'realism' proceed from an identical paradigm of world politics: a nation-state system with little or no integrative superstructure. They differ, however, in their epistemological outlook. The realists display a positivistic standpoint: taking the international system and its premise, power politics, as unalterable givens, they inquire into the feasibility of international organization under these circumstances. The idealists adopt what one might call a critical approach toward social analysis: they do not deny the positive validity of the realists' findings, but they reject the notion that power politics is an unalterable impediment. Instead, they suggest that the promotion of international organizations as building blocs toward a world state or federation is one, if not the only means to transcend power politics and its inherent threat to world peace.3 The weakness of the realists' position is that it allows for no outcome other than a world 'Leviathan' - which they themselves perceptively give little chance of coming into being - or international, i.e., intergovernmental, organizations which function as 'merely new machinery for diplomacy' (Thompson, 1952: 466). Realists consistently fail to analyze international organization as a result, as well as a cause, of sociopolitical change, both nationally and transnationally. The idealist position, for its part, cannot adequately explain why or how a world state or federation would come into existence, except that it is necessary for human survival because of the sorry state in which mankind fmds itself. The apparent weaknesses of this position are that the analysis is almost entirely vohmtaristic and that other-than-maximalist solutions are not considered. The third phase in international organization research (Sohn's period IV and Yalem' s periods IV and V), which leads up to the present, has seen both the elaboration of the 'realist' position' and the emergence of a literature which questions, on empirical grounds, the validity of the premise of both the realist and idealist paradigms of international political analysis: a nation-state system without effective integrative superstructures. More specifically, research on international community formation has raised doubts as to whether its findings are consistent with the old paradigm, i.e., the nation-state system model of world politics.5 For this third phase, Yalem also acknowledges the emergence of a literature which, 2

13 Introduction unlike the historical-descriptive or legalistic approaches still pervading the majority of publications on international organization, has an implicit (empirical-) theoretical orientation. As a concomitant development, Yalem notes an increasing methodological sophistication among some students of international organization. 6 However, except for some favorable comments on the evolving theory of international community formation, Yalem does not evaluate the contribution of the empirical-theory-cummethodology literature to the study of international organization. More recently, Riggs and his associates (1970) and Alger ( ; 1970) have taken it upon themselves to do just this. The analysis of the impact of bthavioralism on the study of the United Nations system by Robert Riggs and his associates is a rather devastating indictment. Though demonstrating a concern to present balanced and qualified conclusions from their pemsal of the relevant literature, they summarize their assessment in the following statement: Behavioral research has probably been the most disappointing in the area of its central concern, that of theory-building. The grand theories tend to be heuristic in nature, divorced from the essential data base; and the best-supported propositions have the natrowest theoretical significance. Despite its aims and pretensions, the approach has not yet produced a coherent set of explanatory propositions to bring order or scientific exactness to the study of international organization or any substantial segment of it (Riggs et al., 1970: 230). These authors add rather pessimistically that 'there is little evidence in the literature surveyed that any coherent theoretical system is likely to emerge in the foreseeable future' (ibm.). The conclusions of Riggs and his associates are essentially corroborated by Chadwick Alger's (1970) 'research on research' in international organization in which he looks specifically at studies from the last ten years relying on quantitative analysis or field work. Alger refrains from making explicit evaluations of the state of the discipline, but his summary of major findings culled from the surveyed publications clearly demonstrates the low level of theoretical achievement: Unrelated oneshot generalizations and bivariate propositions abound, but little effort is spent on pin-pointing their thwretical relevance. This seems to be particularly true for the most frequently encountered kinds of research: studies of elite and mass attitudes toward international organization and analyses of intra-organizational processes The Quest for New Directions in Theory-Building These negative evaluations of the theoretical accomplishments of international organization research to date must not prevent us, however, from recognizing two 3

14 Introduction currents of theoretical and empirical work which point beyond the condition of intellectual sterility justifiably decried by the previously cited reviewers. Almost from the beginning, the study of international community formation has led to the elaboration of theoretical perspectives capable of giving some degree of coherence to a series of hypotheses about the phenomenon under investigation. The two most prominent examples are the communications-theoretical perspective set forth by Karl Deutsch and his students and the field-theoretical perspective. 7 Although relatively powerful analytical tools, these two theoretical perspectives lack an historical dimension; that is, they do not by themselves account for the emergence of a new level of sociopolitical integration nor for its peculiar structural elements. They treat a certain level of community formation as given and concentrate on analyzing the success or failure of specific instances of community formation, be it at the transnational, the national, the local, or any other level. The largely alristorical nature of many of the studies on international community formation contrasts with recent work in the international organization field. The latter, however, is still more in the stage of data-making and quantitative description than in that of theory-building. This work is characterized by the creation of timeseries data on various aspects of international organization-building, in at least one case going back as far as the Congress of Vienna. Thus, Wallace and Singer (1970) have established a data series which gives the number of existing and newly formed intergovernmental organizations at five-year intervals since Skjelsbaek (1970) presents data, originally compiled under the auspices of the Union of International Associations (1957), on the formation of non-governmental international associations since the mid-19th century. Turning from the collection of data on the raw numbers of international organizations to the consideration of more specific aspects of international organization performance, some authors have isolated all instances in which the U.N. and major regional organizations (Haas, 1968a; Haas, Butterworth and Nye, 1972) or the League, the U.N., the P.C.I.J., and the I.e.}. (Coplin and Rochester, 1972) have become involved in attempts to settle international disputes. Others have focused on international organization activities not directly related to the maintenance of international security: Landy (1966), for instance, has analyzed data covering more than thirty years on the supervision by the 1.L.O. of national compliance with international labor standards. In summary, then, there has been an extension of the temporal boundaries within which quantitative, empirical research can be conducted on international organizations. In addition, we observe a trend toward research designs that cover both broad spectra as well as more discriminating sets of cases of international organization-building. The present state of the most advanced areas of international organization research suggests that an effort be made to link up the recent work on collecting historical data with the partial theories of international community-formation such as those of Karl Deutsch, Amitai Etzioni, Ernst Haas and others. To accomplish this objective in a 4

15 Introduction satisfactory marmer, however, it will be necessary to develop a more encompassing theoretical perspective, i.e., a macro-level conception of sociopolitical change based on an evolutionary analysis of human history. B The advantage of a conscious evolutionary approach to the study of sociopolitical change is that it provides a broaderthan-usual framework through which to order contemporary phenomena, while permitting the student of international organization to include his subject matter in the more general study of sociopolitical modernization and development. Moreover, the evolutionary-theoretical framework is capabk of accommodating both macrolevel and micro-level analytical foci. Thus, a desire to understand why given national elites resort to organized multinational cooperation to solve a spcci c recurrent problem transcending the boundaries of individual national societies is as compatible with this perspective as an interest in studying the emergence of an organizational level of integration beyond the nation state as a result of certain secular processes of technological and social change. 9 The first objective, then, of the present study is to develop a theoretical paradigm for the study of international organization-building, in which international organization is seen as a new and distinct level of sociopolitical integration similar, in the evolutionary perspective, to other levels such as the state, the tribe, etc. This theoretical framework will not only have to set forth the relevant integrative mechanisms which are constitutive for successive stages of sociopolitical organization; it must also identify those variables which interact to bring about the changes inducing the transition from one level of sociopolitical integration to another. Secondly, this study attempts to establish a causal linkage between the advance of industrial civilization and its concomitant sociopolitical and ideological processes on the one hand, and the transition from the nation-state level to the international organition level of sociopolitical integration, on the other. From another perspective, our research is directed toward accounting for the advance in international organizationbuilding among members of the international system.10 Finally, the present study purports to substantiate the argument that international organization-building exerts ameliorating effects on the relations among nation states; that is, international organization-building acts as a constraint on national policy-makers (and subnational groups), inhibiting the resort to intersocietal violence for solving conflicts. However, two potential fallacies to which this kind of investigation is exposed should be noted: a confirmation of this hypothesis does not necessarily imply that the greatest peacefulness can be expected from international organization-building which results in the formation of a world authority wielding a legal monopoly of force; nor does a confirmation of this hypothesis mean that international organization-building per se is a sufficient guarantee of international peace. Instead, it appears that international organization-building represents only one component of a comprehensive peace strategy. The important point to be borne in mind is that advanced industrial civilization, by stimulating international organization-building 5

16 NOTES Notes to chapter 1 1 The reviews to which reference is made are Alger ( ; 1970), Riggs et al. (1970), Sohn (1968), and Yalem (1966). For a general overview of the field as seen by leading scholars, cf. the entries under International Organization and International Integration in the International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Vols. 7 and 8 (1968). 2 For a discussion of the development of the discipline of international politics during the same period and some of the suggested periodizations, cf. Brody (1969); Rogowski (1968); Thompson (1952). 3 I have drawn here on the analysis of Political Realism and Political Idealism, particularly as they apply to international politics, by John Herz (1951: 17 ff., 65 ff.) and on an unpublished manuscript by Robert C. North entitled 'Early Geopolitical and Neo-Darwinian Schools of International Politics.' The elaboration of the 'realist' position in the scientific study of international organization is best illustrated by the work of Inis Claude, particularly in the successive editions of his Swords Into Plowshares. Significantly, Raymond Aron's Peace and War (1966), a landmark of realist analysis of international politics, does not even have an entry for international organization or international integration in its index. The various editions of Hans Morgenthau's Politics Among Nations, however, take note of these phenomena. - For a treatment of international organization which displays interesting parallels with the 'realist' position, cf. the book of the prominent Soviet scholar G. J. Morosow on Internationale Organisationen (1971). The impact of the international community formation literature can be observed by comparing recent textbooks on international relations with those of the early 1950's. For instance, the just-published textbook by William Coplin (1971) not only treats international organizations as a separate category of international actors, but introduces them again in his analysis of collective multinational problem-solving. It may be noted in passing that Louis Sohn's review does not mention these theoretical and methodological advances. He emphasizes instead the need for comparative analyses of the constitutional practice in international organizations of all kinds. 7 For the communications-theoretical approach to the study of international community formation, cf. Deutsch et al. (1957); Deutsch (1964a; 1964b; 1966); Puchala (1966); Russett (1963). The field-theoretical perspective has been developed by Quincy Wright (1955; 1965) and Rudolph Rummel (1965). A good survey of these two theoretical approaches as they pertain to the study of international community formation can be found in Cobb and Elder (1970: 7-II). 8 By evolutionary analysis we mean an analytic approach that looks at sociocultural change in terms of directionality along a linear scale based on certain criteria of advancement (Service, 1971: 6, 12). For an elaboration of the evolutionary-theoretical framework which informs the present study on international organization-building and its integrative effectiveness, cf. Chapter 2. While the present study adopts the latter focus, Alker and Christensen (1971) show an interest in the former by reanalyzing Ernst Haas' data on U.N. involvement in international 7

17 Notes to chapter 1 disputes. They emphasize the importance of learning from precedents (i.e., from prior instances of dispute settlement efforts by the U.N.) for subsequent improved adaptation, i.e. more effective peace-keeping. Unfortunately, they do not go so far as to discriminate among U.N. members on the basis of individual country responses reflecting a learning experience from precedents. 10 The empirical research to be reported in Chapters 4 and 5 is based on data which measure the advance of international organization-building within the global context. A flrst test of the basic hypothesis informing our investigations of international organization-building against data on institutional regional groupings has already been carried out with generally encouraging results. Cf. Rittberger (1971). 8

18 Chapter 2: Sociocultural Evolution and Sociopolitical Organization A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK For at least three decades academic political science has largely shunned an explicitly evolutionary approach to the study of sociopolitical change. This was not so much the result of deficiencies inherent in the evolutionary perspective, as it was the by-product of a through reorientation of social and political research from the I930's onwards (Eckstein, 1963: I3-I6 and passim; Lenski, I970: 23-24). Two intellectual currents combined to discredit evolutionary analysis of social and political phenomena. One was the critique of historicism by the philosophers of science, particularly Karl Popper (I964: I05-II9 and passim), which indiscriminately rejected evolutionary analyses. This critique did not carefully distinguish, however, between two kinds of studies in the evolutionary tradition. One posits an inevitable goal of history and/or relies on a monocausally determined projection of the historical process across various stages of sociocultural evolution. The other proceeds by suggesting analytic categories which enable the social scientists to grasp the rich variety of forms of social life over time and to order them along continua expressing degrees of advancement according to historically valid criteria; through empirical investigation it attempts to account for the transition of specific social units, whether analyzed individually or aggregatively, from one form to another.! The second intellectual current hostile to evolutionary analysis was exemplified in the structural-functional approach in the social sciences. Its preoccupation with equilibrium analysis and systemic models of society led to an outlook on the study of sociopolitical change which was informed by an interest in social control. Expressed differently, processes of change were investigated for their disruptive potential vis-a-vis extant social structures and not as social facts that might have intrinsic value. Dissatisfaction with this analytical focus soon spread within academic political science, prompted, in particular, by the acceleration of the decolonization process during the late I950's and early I960's. Yet the renewed scholarly concern about social and political change has not led to theoretical perspectives which consciously transcend the particular historical phenomena of state and nation-building in the Third World. 2 One might add a third intellectual current strongly represented in the social sciences during the recent past which also tends to oppose the analysis of change with an evolutionary perspective: the empiricist reaction against 'grand theory.' However, this position, often coupled with an emphasis on research at the micro-level, lleed not be viewed as antithetical to an evolutionary- theoretical perspective provided the 9

19 Sociocultural Evolution and Sociopolitical Organization research seeks to inform its objectives with broader theoretical questions - a condition which any scientific inquiry should satisfy. 3 Despite these countercurrents, the evolutionary tradition has not completely faded away,4 and it is to be hoped that students of sociopolitical change will increasingly give serious consideration to this theoretical perspective. After all, evolution is, as the eminent anthropologist E. B. Tylor once observed, 'the great principle that every scholar must lay firm hold of, if he intends to understand either the world he lives in or the history of the past' (Sahlins and Service, 1960: 4). 2.1 Research on the Changing Scale of Sociopolitical Organization The study of sociopolitical change can be differentiated according to three major foci of research. Identification of these foci is derived from a conceptualization of the most general aspects of social life to which systematic political analysis addresses itself: (I) sociopolitical organization; (2) government; and (3) public policy. In the present study I intend to concentrate on the first-mentioned aspect, i.e., sociopolitical organization, with an emphasis on its scale. 5 Before proceeding with a theoretical discussion of this subject, however, it will be useful to preface it with a brief review of some studies on the changing scale of sociopolitical organization throughout human history. The notion of a general trend throughout history toward larger sociopolitical organizations has been advanced in the works of many social scientists, partly in speculative ways, partly based on empirical evidence of varying breadth. For instance, Quincy Wright (1957, 1965) - who, together with Harold Lasswell, were the most ilmovative students of world politics in the first half of this century - notes the existence of secular processes of growth in the scale of sociopolitical organization, accompanied by intermittent breakdo\vlls. Furthermore, he asks whether the conditions and mechanisms operative in earlier historical instances of step-level growth in the scale of sociopolitical organization may be of relevance to the study of international organization. He suggests, explicitly or implicitly, three points for investigation: I) What has been the relationship between material culture and sociopolitical organization in the history of mankind? 2) How are sociopolitical organizations of various scales being held together (structural mechanisms of integration)? 3) In which way can one measure the growth in the scale of sociopolitical organization, particularly step-ievd changes? Concerning the first point, Wright asserts an invariant relationship between the scale of sociopolitical organization, on the one hand, and the system of production or material culture, on the other. The effect of greater material productivity on sociopolitical organization is to establish a tendency toward increased complexity and size. 10

20 Sociocultural Evolution and Sociopolitical Organization Accordingly, Wright distinguishes three broad stages of culture change and associates with them varying scales of sociopolitical organization: Among hunting and pastoral peoples clans have been coordinated into tribes and tribes into tribal federations. With fixed agriculture, villages have been coordinated into baronies and baronies into feudal kingdoms, which in tum have sometimes been coordinated into empires. With the rise of industry and trade, cities and villages have been coordinated into national states and national states into federations, confederations, regional arrangements, and general international organization. '-' These processes of coordination and integration have often been interrupted by counter-processes, but the trend of history has been toward larger political units (1957: 30).6 Whereas Quincy Wright does not provide carefully documented evidence to substantiate his sweeping proposition, Hornell Hart and Donald Taylor (Hart, 1948, 1949, 1959; Hart and Taylor, 1944) investigate this asserted linkage between material culture and sociopolitical organization more closely. In an analysis of ethnographic data on 46 modem preliterate peoples, Hart and Taylor (1944; Hart, 1949: 29-37) measure these societies both on a technological and political development scale, the latter being an approximation of our concept of scale of sociopolitical organization. 7 The authors [md a strong positive relationship between technological progress and the scale of sociopolitical organization among primitive societies. In another study, Hart (1949: 37-56) focuses on ancient and modem empires and reaches similar conclusions. Concentrating here on the relationship between transportation teclmology and scale of sociopolitical organization, he finds that 'individual transportational inventions and discoveries... have undoubtedly been related in significant ways to the expansion of political areas' (1949: 56). However, he cautions against accepting this fmding as suggesting an unmediated one-to-one relationship. Instead, he argues that it is more appropriate to investigate the linkage between more general technological- as well as other cultural - trends and the changing scale of sociopolitical organization. This linkage between advances in technology and the increasing scale of sociopolitical organization is also demonstrated by an analysis of data from the Ethnographic Atlas by Gerhard Lenski (1970: 131). Classifying human societies on the basis of their dominant subsistence technology, it is seen that increases in the scale of sociopolitical organization - measured by population size and the degree to which local conununities are merged into translocal societies - vary positively with higher levels of subsistence technology. (Cf., Table 2.1.) This research on the changing scale of sociopolitical organization also yields some remarkable insights into the time factor involved in, and the pattern characteristic of, II