Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

State formation refers to the processes leading to the centralization of political power within a well-defined territory. These processes are not historically and geographically uniform, and there is no single explanation for them. There have been a variety of paths to statehood. This entry deals with the most general question of state formation concerning the historical origin of states as such as well as with more specific questions connected to the development of the modern states system and to state formation in the contemporary world. State formation in early agrarian societies, in the early capitalist West, and in the era of decolonization and imperial dissolution display different processes and institutional features and will also be analyzed.

There are at least three major theoretical perspectives on the state and state formation. The pluralist view describes the state as a set of various interest groups, an arena for contending actors. The state developed, accordingly, through bargaining processes between interest groups. The Marxist view is instrumentalist, with the state as a committee for managing the common interests of the ruling class. Here, the state was established as an instrument of domination. The statist perspective implies that states have emerged as distinctive structures with institutions and modes of operation that cannot be derived from interest group maneuvering or class structure. The latter perspective is particularly associated with Max Weber and even with neo-Marxist critiques of orthodox Marxism. In empirical accounts of state formation, the major theories are rarely employed one-sidedly or spelled out explicitly, but they are often combined into a more compound analysis.

The Origin of the State

State formation requires cooperation and rule within a unit far greater than a kinship group or a community based on face-to-face recognition. A possible explanation for cooperation on a grand scale is population pressure and scarce resources, particularly the shortage of soil. Increasing population density and scarce resources stimulate more intensive food production. Thereby, social complexity increases because agriculture requires division of labor and specialization. Early state formation emerged after the establishment of agricultural societies.

The basic idea here is that societies organized as states will be more efficient externally and internally. Externally, they are stronger, better organized, and more competitive in relation to less well-organized societies. Internally, big units with intensive production may serve the population with services and conditions of life that are unavailable for small groups or individually. Conflict and common defense abroad may also support social integration at home. The inhabitants of a state are in the same boat, sharing threats from the outside.

State formation has not been a linear historical process. States and empires have disintegrated, collapsed, and disappeared, while others have thrived and enlarged over long periods. If the authorities are unable to supply the population with a minimum of services and security, legitimacy and support will erode. This has happened in failed states as well as in many former empires and colonial territories.

States and empires may also disintegrate due to a principal–agent problem. The central authority delegates power and responsibility to the local and regional representatives. The representatives in the periphery may then exploit the derived resources in a quest for autonomy. Imperial erosion and state failure have various elements of these mechanisms.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading