How do institutions shape the number of people whose agreement is needed to change a policy?

In the context of neoinstitutionalism, particularly within the rational choice institutionalist perspective, institutions shape policy change by establishing the formal rules that determine the number of people or actors whose consent is required to alter the status quo.1

By defining these procedural requirements, institutions directly influence the stability of a political system and the ease with which policies can be modified. These rules act as constraints on political actors, prescribing the necessary thresholds for agreement—such as majority support, supermajorities, or consensus—thereby dictating how much effort or negotiation is needed to enact change. Consequently, the specific design of these institutional frameworks determines whether a system is prone to rapid policy shifts or characterized by high levels of stability and resistance to change.1