Abstract
Although many scholars claim to present comparative public policy research (see the various journals and books in this field with the word ‘comparative’ in their titles), only a few scholars appear to have designed a comparative study. My critique here echoes Benoît Rihoux’ observation that, in practice, comparisons are too often ‘rather loose or not formalized’ (Rihoux, 2006: p. 681), and Ahrend Lijphart’s observation that the comparative method appears so basic and apparently simple that when applied it often ‘indicates the how but does not specify the what of the analysis’ (Lijphart, 1971: p. 682). Playing the devil’s advocate, I would like to take these observations a step further and claim that much of published comparative public policy research is ex-post facto comparative and not a priori comparative in nature. I understand this is a bold and sweeping statement, but in reading classic and contemporary comparative works, only a handful may be termed comparative by design (for example, Verba and Nie, 1972; Skocpol, 1979; Vogel, 1996; Levi-Faur, 2006b), whereas many works are comparative by outcome, or are studies that present various examples of a phenomenon of interest without actually having a rationale for comparatively studying these examples. Throughout this book many guidelines will be provided as to how to design comparative public policy research.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
Aliseda, Atocha (2004) ‘Logics in Scientific Discovery’, Foundations of Science, 9 (3), 339–63.
Bennett, Andrew and Elman, Colin (2006) ‘Complex Causal Relations and Case Study Methods: The Example of Path Dependence’, Political Analysis, 14 (3), 250–67.
Brady, Henry and Collier, David (eds) (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry Diverse Tools, Shared Standards (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield).
Braithwaite, John and Drahos, Peter (2000) Global Business Regulation (Cambridge University Press).
Collier, David, Brady, Henry and Seawright, Jason (2004) ‘Sources of Leverage in Causal Inference’, in Henry Brady and David Collier (eds) Rethinking Social Inquiry (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield), 229–66.
Creswell, John and Miller, Dana (2000) ‘Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry’, Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–30.
Della Porta, Donatella (2008) ‘Comparative Analysis: Case-Oriented Versus Variable Oriented Research’, in Donatella Della Porta and Michael Keating (eds) Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (Cambridge University Press), 198–222.
Della Porta, Donatella and Keating, Michael (eds) (2008) Approches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences. A Pluralist Perspective (Cambridge University Press).
Franklin, Mark (2008) ‘Quantitative Analysis’, in Donatella Della Porta and Michael Keating (eds) Approaches and Methdologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (Cambridge University Press), 240–62.
Freeman, G. P. (1985) ‘National Styles and Policy Sectors: Explaining Structured Variation’, Journal of Public Policy, 5 (4), 467–96.
Frendreis, John (1983) ‘Explanation of Variation and Detection of Covariation: The Purpose and Logic of Comparative Analysis’, Comparative Political Studies Comparative Political Studies, 16 (2), 255–72.
Geddes, Barbara (1990) ‘How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics’, Policy Analysis, 2 (1), 131–50.
Gerring, John (2007) ‘Is There a (Viable) Crucial-Case Method?’, Comparative Political Studies, 40 (3), 231–53.
Hollingsworth, Roger, Schmitter, Phillipe and Streeck, Wolfgang (1994) ‘Capitalism, Sectors, Institutions and Performance’, in Roger Hollingsworth, Phillipe Schmitter and Wolfgang Streeck (eds) Governing Capitalist Economies: Performance and Control of Economic Sectors (Oxford University Press), 3–16.
Hopkin, Jonathan (2010) ‘The Comparative Method’, in David Marsh and Gerry Stoker (eds) Theory and Methods in Political Science (New York: Palgrave Macmillan), 285–307.
Jordana, Jacint and Levi-Faur, David (2004). The Politics of Regulation: Institutions and Regulatory Reforms for the Age of Governance (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert and Verba, Sidney (1994). Designing Social Inquiry. Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research (Princeton University Press).
Levi-Faur, David (2004) ‘Comparative Research Designs in the Study of Regulation: How to Increase the Number of Cases Without Compromising the Strengths of Case-Oriented Analysis’, in Jacint Jordana and David Levi-Faur (eds) The Politics of Regulation. Institutions and Regulatory Reforms for the Age of Governance (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), 177–99.
Levi-Faur, David (2006a) ‘A Question of Size?’, in Bernhard Rihoux and Heike Grimm (eds) Innovative Comparative Methods for Policy Analysis (New York: Springer and Kluwer), 43–66.
Levi-Faur, David (2006b) ‘Regulatory Capitalism: The Dynamics of Change beyond Telecoms and Electricity’, Governance, 19 (3), 497–525.
Levi-Faur, David (2006c) ‘Varieties of Regulatory Capitalism: Getting the Most Out of the Comparative Method’, Governance, 19 (3), 367–82.
Levy, Jack (2008) ‘Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference’, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25 (1), 1–18.
Lieberson, Stanley (1992) ‘Small N’s and Big Conclusions’, in Charles Ragin and Garry Becker (eds) What is a Case? (Cambridge University Press), 105–18.
Lijphart, Ahrend (1971) ‘Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method’, The American Political Science Review, 65 (3), 682–93.
Lynggaard, Kennet (2011) ‘Domestic Change in the Face of European Integration and Globalization: Methodological Pitfalls and Pathways’, Comparative European Politics, 9 (1), 18–37.
Mahoney, James (2000) ‘Strategies of Causal Inference in Small-N Analysis’, Sociological Methods Research, 28 (4), 387–424.
Meckstroth, Theodore (1975) ‘“Most Different Systems” and “Most Similar Systems”: A Study in the Logic of Comparative Enquiry’, Comparative Political Studies, 8 (2), 132–57.
Mill, John Stuart (1851) A System of Logic, 3rd edn (London: Longmans, Green, and Co.).
Paavola, Sami (2004) ‘Abduction as a Logic and Methodology of Discovery: The Importance of Strategies’, Foundations of Science, 9 (3), 267–83.
Payne, Geoff and Williams, Malcolm (2005) ‘Generalization in Qualitative Research’, Sociology, 39 (2), 295–314.
Peters, Guy (1998) Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan).
Powell, Bingham (1982) Contemporary Democracies: Participation, Stability, and Violence (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).
Przeworski, Adam and Teune, Henry (1970) The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (New York: Wiley-Interscience).
Putnam, Robert, Leonardi, Robert and Nanetti, Raffaella (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton University Press).
Ragin, Charles (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies (Berkeley: University of California Press).
Ragin, Charles and Becker, Howard (1992) What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry (Cambridge University Press).
Rihoux, Benoit (2006) ‘Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Systematic Comparative Methods’, International Sociology, 21 (5), 679–706.
Seawright, Jason and Gerring, John (2008) ‘Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options’, Political Research Quarterly, 61 (2), 294–308.
Singer, David (1961) ‘The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations’, World Politics: A Quarterly Journal of International Relations, 14 (1), 77–92.
Skocpol, Theda (1979) States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of Trance, Russia, and China (Cambridge University Press).
Tarrow, Sidney (2010) ‘The Strategy of Paired Comparison: Toward a Theory of Practice’, Comparative Political Studies, 43 (2), 230–59.
Van der Heijden, Jeroen (2012) ‘Voluntary Environmental Governance Arrangements’, Environmental Politics, 21 (3), 486–509
Van Waarden, Frans (1995) ‘Persistence of National Policy Styles,’ in Brigitte Unger and Frans Van Waarden (eds) Convergence or Diversity? Internationalization and Economic Policy Response (Aldershot: Avebury), 333–72.
VanWynsberghe, Rob and Khan, Samia (2008) ‘Redefining Case Study’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 6 (2), 80–5.
Venesson, Pascall (2008) ‘Case Studies and Process Tracing: Theories and Practices’, in Donatella Della Porta and Michael Keating (eds) Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences (Cambridge University Press), 223–39.
Verba, Sidney and Nie, Norman (1972) Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (New York: Harper and Row).
Vogel, Steven (1996) Freer Markets, More Rules: Regulatory Reform in Advanced Industrial Countries (London: Cornell University Press).
Yin, Robert (2003). Case Study Research. Design and Methods, 3rd edn (Thousand Oaks: Sage).
Young, Oran (1999). The Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes (Cambridge: MIT Press).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Jeroen van der Heijden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van der Heijden, J. (2014). Selecting Cases and Inferential Types in Comparative Public Policy Research. In: Engeli, I., Allison, C.R. (eds) Comparative Policy Studies. Research Methods Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137314154_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137314154_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-33498-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-31415-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political Science CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)