Comparative Politics – EPS
A.Y. 2011-12
Marco Giuliani - marco.giuliani@unimi.it
Department of Social and Political Sciences – room 201
Office hours: Thursday: 9.30-12.30
Aims and objectives
The comparative method, in its widest meaning, represents the mainstream
method for testing hypotheses in the field of political science. Comparisons
may be both implicit or explicit, employ different techniques and range from
intensive within case study analysis to complex multivariate quantitative
models. The course aims at introducing the student to the major topics of the
current debate in the field of comparative politics and will provide a detailed
understanding of how the main political processes operate within democratic
countries. Methodological issues will be approached in the first part of the
course, followed by a review of the major hypotheses regarding the functioning
of political institutions and organizations and by a series of empirical
researches exemplifying the different “styles” of comparative analysis.
Prerequisites and assessment
Although there aren’t any formal prerequisites, having already passed one or
two introductory courses in political science and comparative politics are
highly recommended. In their absence, the handbook already suggested for
the admission interview is a good way to fill the gaps.
Attendance: 10%
Presentation and discussion: 30%
Intermediate exam: 30%
Final exam: 30%
Timetable
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
10.30-12.15
10.30-12.15
10.30-12.15
C22
C22
C22
Students have to follow at least 80% of the lectures (i.e. you can miss no more
than 6 lectures)
Course outline and syllabus
The course is organized around five topics for a total amount of 30 lectures.
Each reading is compulsory, and has to be completed before the lecture. The
updated reading list will be regularly provided on the web pages of the course
(www.socpol.unimi.it/corsi/compol) and students are more than warmly
invited to have a look at it. Issues in grey imply the active presentation from
behalf of the students. Readings with a star * means that they cannot be
retrieved among the electronic resources available in the university (I do have
hardcopy originals).
Topic 1. Methodology
1. Course presentation (Mon 16 Apr.)
2. Explaining through comparisons (Tue 17 Apr.)
H. Brady, Causation and explanation in social science, in J. BoxSteffensmeier, H. Brady and D. Collier (eds), The Oxford Handbook of
Political Methodology, Oxford, Oxford UP. 2008, pp. 217-249.
3. Still on causation (Wed 18 Apr.)
J. Gerring, Causation. A unified framework for the social sciences, in “Journal
of Theoretical Politics”, 2005, 17(2): 163-198.
4. Between description and prediction (Mon 23 Apr.)
C. Tilly and R. Goodin, It depends, in R. Goodin and C. Tilly (eds), The
Oxford Handbook of Contextual Political Analysis, Oxford, Oxford UP
2006, pp. 3-32.
R. Taagepera, Making Social Sciences More Scientific. The Need for Predictive
Models, Oxford, Oxford UP 2008, ch. 1 and 4
Topic 2. Democracy
5. What do we know about democratization (Tue 24 Apr.)
* B. Geddes, What causes democratization?, in C. Boix and S.C. Stokes
(eds), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics, Oxford, Oxford UP
2007, pp. 317-339.
6. Testing models of democratization (Wed 2 May)
D. Berg-Schlosser and G. de Meur, Conditions of democracy in interwar
Europe: a boolean test of major hypotheses, in “Comparative Politics”, (26)3,
1994, pp. 253-279.
* H. Keman, Comparing democracies: theories and evidence, in H. Keman
(ed.), Comparative democratic politics. A guide to contemporary theory and
research, London, Sage 2002, pp. 32-64.
7. Measuring democracy (Mon 7 May)
H. Munck and J. Verkuilen, Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy.
Evaluating alternative Indices, in “Comparative Political Studies”, 2002, pp.
5-34.








Indices presentation:
Freedom House
Polity 4
Index of effective democracy (Welzel&Inglehart)
Economist Democracy index
Vanhaven index of democracy
ACLP: Alvarez,Cheibub, Limongi & Przeworski
Coppedge & Reinicke Polyarchy
8. Democracy: type or continuum? (Tue 8 May.)
D. Collier and R. Adcock, Democracies and dichotomies: a pragmatic approach
to choices about concepts, in “Annual Review of Political Science”, 1999, 2,
pp. 537-565.
M. Bogaards, Measures of democratization: From degree to type to war, in
“Political Research Quarterly”, 2010, 2, pp. 475-488
Topic 3. Electoral and party systems
9. What do we know about electoral systems? (Wed 9 May)
* R. Taagepera, Electoral systems, in Boix and Stokes (2007), pp. 678-702.
10. The causes of electoral systems (Mon 14 May)
K. Benoit, Electoral Laws as Political Consequences: Explaining the Origins and
Change of Electoral Institutions, in “Annual Review of Political Science”,
(2007), pp. 363-390
Dataset presentation:
Comparative Study of Electoral Systems
http://www.cses.org/
European Election Studies
http://www.ees-homepage.net/
11. The political consequences of electoral systems (Tue 15 May)
A. Lijphart, The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws 1945-85, in
“American Political Science Review”, (84)2, 1990, pp. 481-496.
12. What do we know about party systems? (Wed 16 May)
* H. Kitschelt, Party systems, in Boix and Stokes (2007), pp. 522-554.
13. Dimensions of party competition (Mon 21 May)
Dataset presentation:
Party manifestos https://manifesto-project.wzb.eu/,
Expert surveys (Benoit and Laver, Party Policy in Modern Democracies)
S. Franzmann and A. Kaiser, Locating Political Parties in Policy Space: A
Reanalysis of Party Manifesto Data, in “Party Politics”, 2006, (12)2, pp.
163-188.
K. Benoit and M. Laver, Estimating party policy positions, in "Electoral
Studies", 2007, (26), pp. 90-107.
M.R. Steenbergen e G. Marks, Evaluating expert judgements, in “European
Journal of Political Research”, 2007, (46)3, pp. 347-366.
L. Curini, Experts’ Political Preferences and Their Impact on Ideological Bias.
An Unfolding Analysis based on a Benoit-Laver Expert Survey, in “Party
Politics”, 2009, (16)3, pp. 299-321.
14. Operationalizing party systems dimensions (Tue 22 May)
A. Blau, The Effective number of parties at four scales: Votes, Seats, Legislative
Power and Cabinet Power, in “Party Politics”, (14)2, 2008, pp. 167-187.
H. Stoll, Social Cleavages and the Number of Parties: How the Measures You
Choose Affect the Answer You Get, in “Comparative Political
Studies”,(41)11, 2008, pp. 1439-1465.
15. Fractionalization or polarization? (Wed 23 May)
R.J. Dalton, The quantity and the quality of party systems. Party system
polarization, its measurement, and its consequences, in “Comparative Political
Studies”, (41)7, 2008, pp. 899-920.
Topic 4. Legislatures and Executives
16. Legislative-executive relationship (Mon 28 May)
* D. Samuels, Separation of powers, in Boix and Stokes (2007), pp. 703726.
17. Neither parliamentary, nor presidential (Tue 29 May)
R. Elgie, Variations on a Theme. A fresh look at semipresidentialism, in
“Journal of Democracy”, (16)3, pp. 98-110.
18. The effects on the partyness of government (Wed 30 May)
P. Schleiter and E. Morgan-Jones, Party government in Europe?
Parliamentary and semi-presidential democracies compared, in “European
Journal of Political Research”, (48), 2009, pp. 665-693.
19. Intermediate exam (Mon 4 June)
20. What do we know about coalitions (Wed 6 June)
* K. Strøm & B. Nyblade, Coalition theory and government formation, in Boix
and Stokes (2007), pp. 782-802.
21. The effects on governance (Wed 6 June)
Database presentation:
Worldwide Governance indicators
http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.asp
Bertelsmannstiftung Transformation index
http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xchg/SID-64CED8D643F92735/bst_engl/hs.xsl/52957.htm
Bertelsmannstiftung Sustainable governance index
http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xchg/SID-64CED8D643F92735/bst_engl/hs.xsl/52957.htm
22. Alternation (Mon 11 June)
M. Debus, Office and Policy Payoffs in Coalition Governmnets, in “Party
Politics”, 2007, (14)5, pp. 515-538.
S. Horowitz, K. Hoff and B. Milanovic, Government turnover: Concepts,
measures and applications, in “European Journal of Political Research”,
(48)1, 2009, pp. 107-129.
Database presentation:
Comparative political datasets (I, II and III)
http://www.ipw.unibe.ch/content/team/klaus_armingeon/comparativ
e_political_data_sets/index_ger.html
23. Legislative agenda setting (Tue 12 June)
T. Brauninger and M. Debus, Legislative agenda setting in parliamentary
democracies, in “European Journal of Political Research”, 2009, (48)6, pp.
804-839.
Topic 5. Consequences of political and institutional setups
24. Governments, parties and public policies (Wed 13 June)
M. Schmidt, When parties matter: a review of the possibilities and limits of
partisan influence on public policy, in “European Journal of Political
Research”, (30), 1996, pp. 155-183.
S. Binzer Hobolt e R. Klemmensen, Government responsiveness and political
competition in comparative perspective, in “Comparative Political Studies”,
(41)3, 2008, pp. 309-337.
25. Veto points and institutional constraints (Mon 18 June)
Database presentation:
Beck et al.
http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXT
RESEARCH/0,,contentMDK:20649465~pagePK:64214825~piPK:64
214943~theSitePK:469382,00.html
Henisz
http://www.management.wharton.upenn.edu/henisz/
26. Models of democracy and macro-economic performance (Tue 19 June)
L. Anderson, The implications of institutional design for macroeconomic
performance, in “Comparative Political Studies”, 2001, 34(4): 429-452.
27. Models of democracy and performance (Wed 20 June)
J. Gerring, S. Thacker & C. Moreno, Centripetal Democratic Governance: A
Theory and Global Inquiry, in “American Political Science Review”, 2005,
99(4): 567-581
28. Constitutional setup and fiscal outcomes (Mon 25 June)
T. Persson e G. Tabellini, Constitutional Rules and Fiscal Policy Outcomes, in
“American Economic Review”, (94)1, 2004, pp. 25-45.
29. Conceptualizing economic performance (Tue 26 June)
B. Vis, J. Woldendorp & H. Keman, Economic performance and institutions:
capturing the dependent variable, in “European Political Science Review”,
2012, 4(1): 73-96
30. Final exam (Wed 27 June)