Taylor does not mean institutionalism in the sense of American Institutionalism (e.g., Veblen) nor in the sense of the new institutional economics (e.g., Douglass C. North). Nor does Taylor use the term structuralist in the sense of Althusser. As he notes, structuralism assumes that it is "impossible to understand a macro economy without understanding ... distributive relationships across productive sectors and social groups." Other authors refer to such theories as neo-Kaleckian or post-Keynesian.
Personally, I prefer to refer to these models as structuralist. To call them post-Keynesian, in my view, misleading since it neglects the important influence of Marxian economists in this school of thought. To call them neo-Kaleckian is also misleading because a number of important contemporary authors (i.e., who identify with this school) lack the capacity for insightful political analysis that Kalecki had (e.g., his Fascism of our Times).
epoliticus
-- "In the tender annals of Political Economy, the idyllic reigns from time immemorial ... the present year of course always excepted." -- A German refugee, circa 1867 --
http://epoliticus.wordpress.com/