Comparing government and politics

CHAPTER Comparing government and politics

PREVIEW

So far we have looked at the conceptual and theoretical aspects of comparative politics. But these only begin to have meaning when we put comparison into practice, for which reason we now turn to the practicalities of comparison: the kinds of questions that need to be asked, the methods that can be used, the options for designing a comparative research project, and the pitfalls to be avoided. This chapter is intended in part to be a survey of methods and in part to be a practical How To guide to the comparative process, giving more insight into the dynamics of that process. The goal is not to cover the details of specific techniques such as interviewing or statistical analysis so much as to provide strategies that will help students working on comparative projects of their own.

The chapter begins with a discussion about the number and the use of cases chosen in comparison; these range from one to many, the research methods used being different for single-case studies, those involving a small number of cases (small-N studies), and those involving a large number of cases (large-N studies). The chapter then reviews the features of qualitative and quantitative research methods, and considers some of the challenges faced by comparison, including the troubling problem of too few cases and too many variables. It ends with an assessment of the historical method, which can be useful in offsetting some of the limitations inherent in the case study method.

KEY ARGUMENTS

There is a wide range of options when it comes to conducting comparative political research. It is important to be aware of the potential of comparison as well as the alternatives and limitations.

Researchers have choices to make that include the unit of analysis, the level of analysis, and the variables to be studied.

The three main research methods are the case study, the qualitative approach to a small selection of cases, and the quantitative approach to large numbers of cases.

Comparative research will have different approaches and results according to whether it is empirical or normative in approach, or quantitative or qualitative.

When comparative projects seek to examine the relationship between two or more factors, it is worth considering the relative strengths of the most similar and most different system designs.

History is arguably under-used in comparative political research. Current cases can be compared with past examples, and developments over time can be compared across countries.