Peter Flora (with Stein Kuhnle and Derek Urwin) (eds.

), State Formation, NationBuilding, and Mass Politics in Europe. The Theory of Stein Rokkan. Oxford: Oxford
University Press (Comparative European Politics series), 1999. Pp.xviii + 422. ISBN
0 19 828032 7.

The Norwegian Stein Rokkan (1921-79) was one of the leading social scientists after
the Second World War. An hyperactive scholar, he was committed to international
social science and greatly contributed to the expansion of academic organizations
such as the ISA (International Sociological Association), the IPSA (International
Political Science Association), and the ECPR (European Consortium of Political
Research).
A much-needed compilation of Rokkans prolific work has finally seen the public
light. The task undertaken by the editors has by no means been effortless. Rokkan
was a prolific writer and had his works published by the hundreds. But, up until now,
no systematic review of his concepts, ideas and models had been attempted. The
endeavor carried by Peter Flora, with the assistance of Stein Kuhnle and Derek
Urwin, is to be commended for many reasons. Among these, the systematic
presentation of the very core of Rokkans academic work is to be underlined, i.e. the
attempt to develop a macro-model of European political development. This model
was no other than that of state formation, nation-building, and mass politics, as
indicated in the tittle of the book.
As a Renaissance-type of inquirer Rokkan sought to combine both the old
tradition of macrosociology and the new developments of social science databases
and methodology. In this respect, he can be regarded as an innovator within
mainstream sociology and as one of the main instigators for bringing the territorial
dimension to the fore of social analyses. For him there was no doubt that functional
dimensions of society are of decisive importance in all aspects of human life. But
territoriality was also of no lesser significance. The academic interest developed in
recent years on the spatial dimension of politics and powers seems to corroborate
the soundness of Rokkans pioneering research.
A long introduction (91 pages) written by Peter Flora serves the purpose of
providing the reader with useful insights and interpretations on how to make sense
of the vast amount of data and information provided in subsequent chapters. A
cascade of concepts and ideas put forward by Rokkan are analyzed in a clarifying
manner. As an alternative, the reader is invited to proceed first with the reading of
Rokkans original works contained in the book in order to make a better contrast of
the systematization put forward by Flora in the introductory section. I do not advice
to follow such a route. Floras pages are the product of several years of meticulous
analyses and provide the reader with effective Socratic guidance.
Many of the conceptual expressions used by Stein Rokkan have become
coined terms of generalized use within the international academia of social sciences.
His prime concern was to describe and explain differences in the structuring of
political systems in Europe and to make structural comparisons between them. Here
functional and territorial differentiation was crucial for him. In his basic model,
Rokkan strove to circumscribe the potentially limitless program of such structural
comparisons into two main areas of analysis: (1) specific organizations and
institutions (party and electoral systems); and (2) center-periphery structures and
cleavages. With respect to the latter, he regards them as fundamental oppositions
1

within a territorial population, which stands out from the multiplicity of conflicts rooted
in the social structure. The interest of Rokkan for explaining the European cleavage
structures encouraged him to look further back in history to the early processes of
state formation and nation-building.
Boundary-building was another key concept developed by Rokkan of an equal
significance to that of structuring. The interrelations between internal structuring and
external boundary-building became central for understanding the connections
between state formation (military an administrative boundary-building) and nationbuilding (cultural boundary-building) on the one hand, and the development and
structuring of mass democracies on the other. According to Flora, the interpretation
made by Rokkan of mass political democratization is related to the dismantling of
internal boundaries, or the removal of barriers or thresholds prohibiting entry into the
political system.
Regarding his research program, one of Rokkans main objectives was to
achieve parsimonious explanations and, thus, variance reduction in sorting out his
macro-model of Europes development. This concern is noticeable throughout all his
scattered published texts, chronologically reviewed in the book. Rokkans basic
approach rests upon four main features: (a) the attempt to spell out region- and
period-specific models; (b) the aim of elaborating European configurations rather
than hierarchies of factors; (c) the use of retrospective diachronics in the analysis of
long-term development; and (d) the concentration on a comparisons of structures.
The encompassing context of Rokkans region-specific macro-models is the
evolution of Europe since the late Middle Ages, and having the Old Continent as a
relatively well-defined unity. He was more interested with the multiplicity of evolving
political systems than with the European encompassing entity. Further to this,
Rokkan committed his research to accomplish an integrated but not hierarchical
model.
In order to overcome contextual constraints in dealing with synchronic
structural elements and diachronic developmental processes, the Norwegian social
scientist put forward notions of critical junctures and freezing of structures and
boundaries. However, Rokkans approach neglected to a certain degree the role of
social actors in historical outcomes and, consequently, the question of available
options and motives for action. Further to this, his models can be criticized as static,
a general accusation of much comparative research done in the last decades.
Likewise, criticism has been raised at the exercise of constraining complex
and dynamic objects of study into a typological-topological map of Europe. Indeed,
as a complex social evolving system, Europes history needs to be further taken into
account so that sequencialization (linearity) can be more accurately put into place, if
at all possible. There is a variety of evolutionary concepts that we should keep in
mind when thinking of social systems as complex-chaotic-adaptative systems, such
as non-repetitiveness of history, the role of historical singularities, the non-teleology
of dynamics, or the sedimentation of characteristics. All things considered, Rokkans
admirable effort to engage in deciphering such a vast object of study offers an
example for the new generations of social scientists. It also sets the standards in
cross-national comparative research to extraordinarily high levels of academic
excellence.
LUIS MORENO
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientficas, Madrid
2