Comparative politics

Last updated
Beijing China Tiananmen-Square-05.jpg
United States Capitol west front edit2 (cropped).jpg
Parliament House at dusk, Canberra ACT.jpg
National Assembly (25967498804).jpg
Diet of Japan Kokkai 2009.jpg
Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Bangunan Parlimen Malaysia-02.jpg
National Assembly Building, Abuja, Nigeria.jpg
Parliament in company gardens (cropped).jpg
Ottawa - ON - Parlamentsgebaude (Centre Block).jpg
Berlin Reichstag BW 2.jpg
Palacio del Congreso de la Nacion Argentina (2014).JPG
Palacio Nereu Ramos.jpg
Select parliaments of the world, from top left to right: 1. National People's Congress, People's Republic of China; 2. United States Congress, United States of America; 3. Parliament of Australia, Australia; 4. Jatiya Sangsad, Bangladesh; 5. National Diet, Japan; 6. Parliament of Malaysia, Malaysia; 7. National Assembly, Nigeria; 8. Parliament of South Africa, South Africa; 9. Parliament of Canada, Canada; 10. Bundestag, Germany; 11. National Congress of Argentina, Argentina; 12. National Congress of Brazil, Brazil.

Comparative politics is a field in political science characterized either by the use of the comparative method or other empirical methods to explore politics both within and between countries. Substantively, this can include questions relating to political institutions, political behavior, conflict, and the causes and consequences of economic development. When applied to specific fields of study, comparative politics may be referred to by other names, such as comparative government (the comparative study of forms of government).

Contents

Definition

Comparative politics is the systematic study and comparison of the diverse political systems in the world. It is comparative in searching to explain why different political systems have similarities or differences and how developmental changes came to be between them. It is systematic in that it looks for trends, patterns, and regularities among these political systems. The research field takes into account political systems throughout the globe, focusing on themes such as democratization, globalization, and integration. New theories and approaches have been used in political science in the last 40 years thanks to comparative politics. Some of these focus on political culture, dependency theory, developmentalism, corporatism, indigenous theories of change, comparative political economy, state-society relations, and new institutionalism. [1] Some examples of comparative politics are studying the differences between presidential and parliamentary systems, democracies and dictatorships, parliamentary systems in different countries, multi-party systems such as Canada and two-party systems such as the United States. Comparative politics must be conducted at a specific point in time, usually the present. A researcher cannot compare systems from different periods of time; it must be static. [1]

While historically the discipline explored broad questions in political science through between-country comparisons, contemporary comparative political science primarily uses subnational comparisons. [2] More recently, there has been a significant increase in the interest of subnational comparisons and the benefit it has on comparative politics. We would know far less about major credible issues within political science if it weren't for subnational research. Subnational research contributes important methodological, theoretical, and substantive ideas to the study of politics. [3] Important developments often obscured by a national-level focus are easier to decipher through subnational research. An example could be regions inside countries where the presence of state institutions have been reduced in effect or value. [3]

The name comparative politics refers to the discipline's historical association with the comparative method, described in detail below. Arend Lijphart argues that comparative politics does not have a substantive focus in itself, but rather a methodological one: it focuses on "the how but does not specify the what of the analysis." [4] Peter Mair and Richard Rose advance a slightly different definition, arguing that comparative politics is defined by a combination of a substantive focus on the study of countries' political systems and a method of identifying and explaining similarities and differences between these countries using common concepts. [5] [6]

Sometimes, especially in the United States, the term "comparative politics" is used to refer to "the politics of foreign countries." This usage of the term is disputed. [7] [8]

Comparative politics is significant because it helps people understand the nature and working of political frameworks around the world. There are many types of political systems worldwide according to the authentic, social, ethnic, racial, and social history. Indeed, even comparative constructions of political association shift starting with one country then onto the next. For instance, India and the United States are majority-rule nations; nonetheless, the U.S. has a liberal vote-based presidential system contrasted with the parliamentary system used in India. Even the political decision measure is more diverse in the United States when found in light of the Indian popular government. The United States has a president as their leader, while India has a prime minister. Relative legislative issues encourage us to comprehend these central contracts and how the two nations are altogether different regardless of being majority rule. This field of study is critical for the fields of international relations and conflict resolution. Near politics encourages international relations to clarify worldwide legislative issues and the present winning conditions worldwide. Although both are subfields of political science, comparative politics examines the causes of international strategy and the effect of worldwide approaches and frameworks on homegrown political conduct and working.

History of the field

Harry H. Eckstein traces the history of the field of comparative politics back to Aristotle, and sees a string of thinkers from Machiavelli and Montesquieu, to Gaetano Mosca and Max Weber, Vilfredo Pareto and Robert Michels, on to James Bryce - with his Modern Democracies (1921) - and Carl Joachim Friedrich - with his Constitutional Government and Democracy (1937) - contributing to its history. [9]

Two traditions reaching back to Aristotle and Plato

Philippe C. Schmitter argues that the "family tree" of comparative politics has two main traditions: one, invented by Aristotle, that he calls "sociological constitutionalism"; a second, that he traced back to Plato, that he calls "legal constitutionalism"". [10]

Schmitter places various scholars under each tradition:

Periodization as a field of political science

Gerardo L. Munck offers the following periodization for the evolution of modern comparative politics, as a field of political science - understood as an academic discipline - in the United States: [12]

Contemporary patterns, 2000-present

Since the turn of the century, several trends in the field can be detected. [13]

Substantive areas of research

By some definitions, comparative politics can be traced back to Greek philosophy, as Plato's Republic and Aristotle's The Politics .

As a modern sub-discipline, comparative politics is constituted by research across a range of substantive areas, including the study of:

While many researchers, research regimes, and research institutions are identified according to the above categories or foci, it is not uncommon to claim geographic or country specialization as the differentiating category.

The division between comparative politics and international relations is artificial, as processes within nations shape international processes, and international processes shape processes within states. [14] [15] [16] Some scholars have called for an integration of the fields. [17] [18] Comparative politics does not have similar "isms" as international relations scholarship. [19]

Methodology

While the name of the subfield suggests one methodological approach ( the comparative method ), political scientists in comparative politics use the same diversity of social scientific methods as scientists elsewhere in the field, including experiments, [20] comparative historical analysis, [21] case studies, [22] survey methodology, and ethnography. [23] Researchers choose a methodological approach in comparative politics driven by two concerns: ontological orientation [24] and the type of question or phenomenon of interest. [25]

(Mill's) comparative method

Subnational comparative analysis

Since the turn of the century, many students of comparative politics have compared units within a country. Relatedly, there has been a growing discussion of what Richard O. Snyder calls the "subnational comparative method." [27]

See also

Related Research Articles

Political science is the scientific study of politics. It is a social science dealing with systems of governance and power, and the analysis of political activities, political thought, political behavior, and associated constitutions and laws.

A case study is an in-depth, detailed examination of a particular case within a real-world context. For example, case studies in medicine may focus on an individual patient or ailment; case studies in business might cover a particular firm's strategy or a broader market; similarly, case studies in politics can range from a narrow happening over time like the operations of a specific political campaign, to an enormous undertaking like world war, or more often the policy analysis of real-world problems affecting multiple stakeholders.

Arend d'Angremond Lijphart is a Dutch-American political scientist specializing in comparative politics, elections and voting systems, democratic institutions, and ethnicity and politics. He is Research Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego. He is influential for his work on consociational democracy and his contribution to the new Institutionalism in political science.

Modernization theory holds that as societies become more economically modernized, wealthier and more educated, their political institutions become increasingly liberal democratic. The "classical" theories of modernization of the 1950s and 1960s, most influentially articulated by Seymour Lipset, drew on sociological analyses of Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, and Talcott Parsons. Modernization theory was a dominant paradigm in the social sciences in the 1950s and 1960s, and saw a resurgence after 1991, when Francis Fukuyama wrote about the end of the Cold War as confirmation on modernization theory.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Barrington Moore Jr.</span> American sociologist (1913–2005)

Barrington Moore Jr. was an American political sociologist, and the son of forester Barrington Moore.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theda Skocpol</span> American sociologist and political scientist (born 1947)

Theda Skocpol is an American sociologist and political scientist, who is currently the Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology at Harvard University. She is best known as an advocate of the historical-institutional and comparative approaches, as well as her "state autonomy theory". She has written widely for both popular and academic audiences. She has been President of the American Political Science Association and the Social Science History Association.

Neil Joseph Smelser (1930–2017) was an American sociologist who served as professor of sociology at the University of California, Berkeley. He was an active researcher from 1958 to 1994. His research was on collective behavior, sociological theory, economic sociology, sociology of education, social change, and comparative methods. Among many lifetime achievements, Smelser "laid the foundations for economic sociology."

Juan José Linz Storch de Gracia was a German-born Spanish sociologist and political scientist specializing in comparative politics. He was Sterling Professor Emeritus of Sociology and Political Science at Yale University and an honorary member of the Scientific Council at the Juan March Institute. He is best known for his work on authoritarian political regimes and democratization.

Adam Przeworski is a Polish-American professor of political science specializing in comparative politics. He is Carroll and Milton Professor Emeritus in the Department of Politics of New York University. He is a scholar of democratic societies, theory of democracy, social democracy and political economy, as well as an early proponent of rational choice theory in political science.

Historical institutionalism (HI) is a new institutionalist social science approach that emphasizes how timing, sequences and path dependence affect institutions, and shape social, political, economic behavior and change. Unlike functionalist theories and some rational choice approaches, historical institutionalism tends to emphasize that many outcomes are possible, small events and flukes can have large consequences, actions are hard to reverse once they take place, and that outcomes may be inefficient. A critical juncture may set in motion events that are hard to reverse, because of issues related to path dependency. Historical institutionalists tend to focus on history to understand why specific events happen.

Harold J. Noah was an American educator, whose research and writing have focused on comparative education and economics of education. He was born in London, England, and moved to the United States in 1958. His higher education began at the London School of Economics and King’s College, University of London, and was followed by a Ph.D. at Teachers College, Columbia University. He served as Professor at Teachers College, Columbia, from 1964 to 1987. He was appointed to the Gardner Cowles chair in economics of education. He served as Dean of the College from 1976 to 1981. He is widely recognized as a distinguished authority in the field of comparative education.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Guillermo O'Donnell</span> Argentine political scientist (1936–2011)

Guillermo Alberto O'Donnell Ure was a prominent Argentine political scientist who specialized in comparative politics and Latin American politics. He spent most of his career working in Argentina and the United States, and who made lasting contributions to theorizing on authoritarianism and democratization, democracy and the state, and the politics of Latin America. His brother is Pacho O'Donnell.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gabriel Almond</span> American political scientist (1911–2002)

Gabriel Abraham Almond was an American political scientist best known for his pioneering work on comparative politics, political development, and political culture.

Gerardo L. Munck is a political scientist specializing in comparative politics. He is professor of political science and international relations at the University of Southern California.

Alfred C. Stepan was an American political scientist specializing in comparative politics and Latin American politics. He was the Wallace S. Sayre Professor of Government at Columbia University, where he was also director of the Center for the Study of Democracy, Toleration and Religion. He is known for his comparative politics research on the military, state institutions, democratization, and democracy.

David Collier is an American political scientist specializing in comparative politics. He is Chancellor's Professor Emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. He works in the fields of comparative politics, Latin American politics, and methodology. His father was the anthropologist Donald Collier.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Philippe C. Schmitter</span> American political scientist (born 1936)

Philippe C. Schmitter is an American political scientist specializing in comparative politics. He is Emeritus Professor of the Department of Political and Social Sciences at the European University Institute.

Critical juncture theory focuses on critical junctures, i.e., large, rapid, discontinuous changes, and the long-term causal effect or historical legacy of these changes. Critical junctures are turning points that alter the course of evolution of some entity. Critical juncture theory seeks to explain both (1) the historical origin and maintenance of social order, and (2) the occurrence of social change through sudden, big leaps.

Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World (1966) is a book by Barrington Moore Jr.

Comparative federalism is a branch of comparative politics and comparative government, the main focus of which is the study of the nature, operation, possibilities and effects of federal governance forms across two or more cases.

References

  1. 1 2 Wiarda, Howard (June 17, 2019). Wiarda, Howard J (ed.). New Directions in Comparative Politics. doi:10.4324/9780429494932. ISBN   978-0-429-49493-2. S2CID   199146538.
  2. ↑ Clark, William; Golder, Matt; Golder, Sona (2019). Foundations of Comparative Politics. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press. p. 6. ISBN   978-1-5063-6073-7.
  3. 1 2 Giraudy, Agustina (2019). Giraudy, Agustina; Moncada, Eduardo; Snyder, Richard (eds.). Subnational Research in Comparative Politics. doi:10.1017/9781108678384. ISBN   978-1-108-67838-4. S2CID   242754128.
  4. ↑ Lijphart, Arend (1971). "Comparative politics and the comparative method". American Political Science Review. 65 (3): 682–693. doi:10.2307/1955513. JSTOR   1955513. S2CID   55713809.
  5. ↑ Mair, Peter (1996). "Comparative politics: An introduction to comparative.overview". In Goodin, Robert E.; Klingemann, Hans-Dieter (eds.). A New Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 309–335. ISBN   0-19-829471-9. Archived from the original on 2011-06-06. Retrieved 2008-08-25.
  6. ↑ Rose, Richard; MacKenzie, W. J. M. (1991). "Comparing forms of comparative analysis". Political Studies. 39 (3): 446–462. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1991.tb01622.x. S2CID   145410195. Archived from the original on 2012-10-21.
  7. ↑ Hopkin, J. [2002 (1995)] "Comparative Methods", in Marsh, D. and G. Stoker (ed.) Theory and Methods in Political Science, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 249–250
  8. ↑ van Biezen, Ingrid; Caramani, Daniele (2006). "(Non)comparative politics in Britain". Politics. 26 (1): 29–37. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9256.2006.00248.x. S2CID   145654851. Archived from the original on 2013-01-05.
  9. ↑ Harry Eckstein, "A Perspective on Comparative Politics, Past and Present," pp. 3–32, in David Apter and Harry Eckstein (eds.), Comparative Politics: A Reader (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1963).
  10. ↑ Philippe C. Schmitter, "The Nature and Future of Comparative Politics." European Political Science Review 1,1 (2009): 33–61, pp. 36–38. Schmitter's depiction of the "family tree" of comparative politics can be found here: https://www.eui.eu/Documents/DepartmentsCentres/SPS/Profiles/Schmitter/Thefamilytreeofcomppol.pdf
  11. 1 2 Philippe C. Schmitter, "The Nature and Future of Comparative Politics." European Political Science Review 1,1 (2009): 33–61, p. 38.
  12. ↑ Gerardo L. Munck, "The Past and Present of Comparative Politics," pp. 32-59, in Munck and Richard Snyder, Passion, Craft, and Method in Comparative Politics (Baltimore, Md.: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007). Munck's periodization has been validated by Matthew Charles Wilson, "Trends in Political Science Research and the Progress of Comparative Politics," PS: Political Science & Politics 50(4)(2017): 979-984.
  13. ↑ Gerardo L. Munck and Richard Snyder "Comparative Politics at a Crossroad: Problems, Opportunities and Prospects from the North and South." Política y Gobierno (Mexico) 26, 1 (2019): 139-58
  14. ↑ Kopstein, Jeffrey; Lichbach, Mark (2005). Comparative Politics: Interests, Identities, and Institutions in a Changing Global Order. Cambridge University Press. p. 3. ISBN   978-1-139-44604-4.
  15. ↑ Hurrell, Andrew; Menon, Anand (1996). "Politics like any other? Comparative politics, international relations and the study of the EU". West European Politics. 19 (2): 386–402. doi:10.1080/01402389608425139. ISSN   0140-2382.
  16. ↑ Pollack, Mark A. (2005). "Theorizing the European Union: International Organization, Domestic Polity, or Experiment in New Governance?". Annual Review of Political Science. 8 (1): 357–398. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.082103.104858 . ISSN   1094-2939.
  17. ↑ Milner, Helen V. (1998). "Rationalizing Politics: The Emerging Synthesis of International, American, and Comparative Politics". International Organization. 52 (4): 759–786. doi:10.1162/002081898550743. ISSN   1531-5088. S2CID   145584969.
  18. ↑ Nadkarni, Vidya; Williams, J. Michael (2010). "International Relations and Comparative Politics". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.408. ISBN   978-0-19-084662-6. Archived from the original on 2018-12-05.
  19. ↑ Finnemore, Martha; Sikkink, Kathryn (2001). "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics". Annual Review of Political Science. 4 (1): 391–416. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.391 . S2CID   3640392.
  20. ↑ Gerber, Alan; Green, Donald (2012). Field Experiments: Design, Analysis, and Interpretation. New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Company. ISBN   978-0-393-97995-4.
  21. ↑ Mahoney, James; Thelen, Kathleen, eds. (2015). Advances in Comparative-Historical Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
  22. ↑ Geddes, Barbara (2010). Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. ISBN   978-0-472-09835-4.
  23. ↑ Simmons, Erica; Rush Smith, Nicholas (2017). "Comparison with an Ethnographic Sensibility". PS: Political Science & Politics. 50 (1): 126–130. doi:10.1017/S1049096516002286. S2CID   157955394.
  24. ↑ Hall, Peter (2003). "Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Politics" . In Mahoney, James; Rueschemeyer, Dietrich (eds.). Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. ISBN   0-521-81610-6.
  25. ↑ King, Gary; Keohane, Robert; Verba, Sidney (1994). Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN   0-691-03470-2.
  26. 1 2 Anckar, Carsten. "On the Applicability of the Most Similar Systems Design and the Most Different Systems Design in Comparative Research." International Journal of Social Research Methodology 11.5 (2008): 389–401. Informaworld. Web. 20 June 2011.
  27. ↑ Richard Snyder, "Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method," Studies in Comparative International Development, 36:1 (Spring 2001): 93-110; Agustina Giraudy, Eduardo Moncada, and Richard Snyder (eds.), Inside Countries: Subnational Research in Comparative Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2019.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.