Comparative Politics
I.
Introductory notes.
Methodological notes
Luca Verzichelli / Alessandro Chiaramonte
Comparative Political Institutions
Academic year 2015 - 2016
About the course
Student profile
• Not necessarily a specialist of
comparative politics, but a
student curious about politics
and interested to the empirical
analysis
• Perspective proactive student.
Able to stimulate discussions
on perspectives and evidence
of comparative research,
• as well as on the the main
social science approaches
• A perspective professional
presenter
Expectations
• A comprehensive discussion
of each problem at stake
• A comprehensive review of
the literature approached
week by week
• Comprehensive (but not
long!) presentations
• A professional “term paper”
applying a (restricted)
comparative analysis to a
specific unit
A look to the syllabus
• Attendance and participation as important criteria for
evaluation
• Selective syllabus: we focus on a limited number of topics
(governmental institutions and parties) to have time to
discuss it. Core readings are really “core” and compulsory!
• Further stimuli about the “world of comparative politics”
to be found in the syllabus (Caramani is particularly
indicated to non expert students)
• Advanced PhD course but still “introductory”: presentation
style and command of methods and approaches are our
main concern
Comparing political phenomena
• Toqueville Democracy in America: example of
(explicit) structural comparison among political
systems: “Without comparisons to make, the mind
does not know how to proceed”
• Other recent examples …
Common Good
Partial / Private Good
Rule by one
Monarchy
Tyranny / Despotism
rule of master over slaves
Rule by few
Aristocracy (rule by the
best)
Oligarchy (rule by few)
(wealthy)
Rule by many
Polity (ruled by different
groups)
Democracy (rule by the
people) (poor)
Comparative politics: method or discipline per se?
• Classics works (Toqueville to Wilson) based on the “logic of comparison”
(Mills) without a clear focus on the target of comparative exercise
• Then, long story of consolidation of a (sub)discipline of PS based on (1) a
statutory mission: providing a comprehensive explanation of political
phenomena, (2) a scientific ambition: working on non-sperimental
scientific environment, and keeping a specific and sophisticated method
in order to test hypotheses concerning the variance among political
systems.
• Stepping stones after IIWW
- Easton (1956): political system as a unit of analysis
- Almond and Powell (1966): how to overcome the provincialism in
applying the system theory basing our inference on comparisons at the
level of analysis of political system
- Sartori (1970/1991): comparing instead of miscomparing (conceptual
stretching, degreeism, misclassification, parochialism)
- Lijphart (1971): selection of case(s) to be studied
- Ragin (1994): Constructing social research. QCA and the approach of
qualitative comparison
Lijparth 1971: how to minimize the
“too many variable/small N problem”
Lijphart, A. 1971. Comparative politics and the
comparative method. American Political Science
Review 65 (Sept): 682-93.
• Increase the number of cases as much as possible
• Reduce the property-space of the analysis
• Focus the comparative analysis on comparative
cases
• Focus the comparative analysis on the key
variables
Sartori: typical miscomparisons
• Conceptual stretching: A book titled Coalition politics
in the US. Be carefull with the use of given expressions
• Degreeism: who fixes the cut off points? As we are not
able to see the difference between a cat and a dog, we
speak of different degrees of cat-dogs
• Misclassification, christians, Jewish, Muslim, …
catholic
• Parochialism, excessive reliance in country based
inferences and ignorance on the overall phenomena
Some shared points
• Comparison is a fundamental exercise for all
human reflections (empirical and theoretical)
• Comparison is the methodological core of
scientific study of social sciences
– compare the past and present
– compare experiences from different nations
– develop explanations
– test theories in non experimental environments
Methods of comparative analysis
Method
Strenght
Weakness
Experimental method
(few application)
(Few application)
Statistical method
Extensive information
Little interpretation
Case Study
In-depth knowledge
Generic comparison
Comparative method
Hypothesis testing
Limited application
• Progressive identification between the idea of
application of comparative method(s) and
comparative politics …
• … but this implies a dynamic of transformation of
the “mission” of comparative politics
(Fabbrini/Molutsi 2011)
We are all comparatists now (Lees 2006)
Evidences from professional consolidation of PS
• Most of top PS journal are truly comparative
or “specialised” but open to comparative
analyses
• Books on single countries are now much less
relevant
Therefore
• Relative isolation of the single-country canon
• Necessary innovative and careful use of case
study design (Gerring)
Comparative politics theories
the 3 neo-institutionalisms
• Rational choice institutionalism
• Historical institutionalism
• Sociological institutionalism
Comparative politics theories
the 3 neo-institutionalisms (Hall)
• Historical institutionalism:
Background: response to group theory of politics and structuralfunctionalism. Institutions are formal or informal procedures, routines,
norms and conventions embedded in the organizational structure of the
polity or political economy.
Key dynamics: path dependency. Trend: sedimentation of similar collective
institutions, based on shared values
• Rational choice institutionalism
Same definition of institutions but emphasis on the role of strategic
interactions and individual behaviours. Trend: diffusion of model of
institutional settings based on dominant views (methodologic individualism).
Later, a second generation of “non institution-free” rational neoinstitutionalism
• Sociological institutionalism
Key variable: ‘social appropriateness’ of given institutional arrangements (but
not others). Institutional arrangements thus vary depending on cultural and
contextual variables.
Issues of current comparative politics
•
•
•
•
Regime changes and democratic development
Specific institutions
Actors: parties, movements, interest groups ..
Quality of democracy and constitutional
comparative politics
• Democratic representation and participatory
democracy
• Comparative policy analysis and politics of
policy making