1 / 14

The Travelling problem in comparative politics

The Travelling problem in comparative politics. Alistair Cole. Introduction and context . Text an excerpt from Comparative Politics: theory and Methods, by Guy Peters, one of the leading US political scientists

lotus
Download Presentation

The Travelling problem in comparative politics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Travelling problem in comparative politics Alistair Cole

  2. Introduction and context • Text an excerpt from Comparative Politics: theory and Methods, by Guy Peters, one of the leading US political scientists • Interesting especially insofar as it deals with how to translate concepts – the real politics of translation in comparative politics.

  3. General context and introduction • Researchers engaged in comparative research practice face the challenge of establishing the equivalence of both the theoretical concepts applied across a range of cases and the indicators or variables identified that relate to these concepts. • There are various conventions... that some, like Sartori, would see as rules.

  4. Q. Levels of the travelling problem? • One is conceptual: does a specific measure mean the same things in different cultural contexts? • This is important in carrying out quantitative empirical analysis, e.g. On democracy or culture or symbols • Concepts mean different things in different contexts. • The example used by Peters is that of bureaucracy. The standard definition of bureaucracy is drawn from Max Weber. • But bureaucracy can be accepted as neutral is some contexts (Germany), but pejorative in others (UK)

  5. Defining Democracy • Peters gives the example of Schmitter’s attempt to define a cross-national explanation of democracy. • This can be done either in terms of an ideal type (Weber: what features correspond to an ideal type of model); or by defining sub-types that each contain some element of the phenomenon, but differ in other respects. • Democracy? Schmitter and Mahon qualify the generic terms by the use of the adjective: Corporatist Democracy, Populist Democracy, Consociational Democracy, Electoralist democracy... • The concept of democracy is essentially contestable

  6. Varieties of.... • Comparative politics addresses the idea of variation. • The theme mentioned here is that of varieties of democracy • But there is also a recent debate about varieties of capitalism: coordinated market, liberal market, or state market (Schmidt). • Another example – not in the text – that of institutionalism.

  7. The ladder of abstraction (Sartori) • Sartori’s (1970) ‘ladder of abstraction’ identified two complimentary strategies in tacking equivalence: • moving ‘down’ the ladder to generate further differentiation of concepts with more defined attributes applied to fewer cases • or alternatively moving ‘up’ the ladder to avoid ‘conceptual stretching’, whereby concepts have fewer defined attributes but can be applied to more cases. • Sartori’s analysis has provided a useful foundation for a range of contributions to the challenges of concept formation within the comparative context (see for example Collier & Mahon, 1993; Collier & Levitsky, 1997; Collier & Adcock, 1999).

  8. The ladder of abstraction as continuum • The ladder of abstraction allows similar concepts to be applied to distinctive contexts. • Hence ‘corporate pluralism’ might make sense in Norway (bottom of the ladder) • but be more akin to Corporatism in Germany (i.e. iron triangle ) or to pluralism in the UK. (mid-way up the ladder) • In the higher level of abstraction, it might just refer to state-society relations. (top of the ladder) • However, comparing policy contexts across national boundaries continues to present conceptual challenges, with some responses to the development of conceptual equivalence critiqued for potentially generating too many concepts or sub-types, leading to confusion and stifling comparison (Collier & Levitsky, 1997)

  9. The ladder of abstraction as continuum... continued • More general concepts allow wider comparison, but they lose their sharpness. • The more abstract concepts become…. the wider their coverage, but the more meaningless they can also be. • Contenders for this are: institutionalism, governance, Europeanisation… • Does a concept need an adjective? If so, is its weight lessened? • Can a concept logically be opposed with another concept? This is key to the idea of falsification (Parsons). If a theory can include all cases, then it can not be falsified, hence it is meaningless.

  10. Intension • Sartori also uses the idea of intension. How many attributes are used in a concept? • The more detailed the concept, the less likely it is to be widely applicable. • Hence ‘corporate pluralism’: requires a system to contain both these elements, that is, competition between interests, and the influence of interests.

  11. Less positivist approaches • The other approach is to adopt more interpretative frames; not literally to measure/falsify, but to understand and interpret. • Literally, the Sartori model is too limiting. • Collier and Mahon prefer the idea of sharing some attributes, or radial categories. • A case has either a family resemblance (sharing most categories of a concept), or shares one dominant characteristic (radial categories). • Hence, corporatism remains useful because it describes a dominant characteristic: though it might be defined in different ways in distinct countries, it refers to organised patterns of state-society relations

  12. Concept stretching and trade-offs • Prezeworski and Teune argues in favour of a systems-specific approach...allowing different measures to define the same category or concept. • The idea of functional equivalence goes in the same direction. Concepts need to be adapted and treated flexibly, if they are to be meaningful. • There are trade-offs in comparative research

  13. A continuum • The key point about the ladder of abstraction is this is a continuum, or a spectrum; there are ways of positioning oneself depending upon where one is situated along the spectrum. • A single case study will allow a high degree of ‘intension’ - which might be appropriate for a single or binary case study. But a quantitative mass survey needs ‘extension’ – a concept that can travel, hence is relatively simple, with few characteristics.

  14. Empirical travelling problems: • Peters gives the examples of the Welfare State and low voter participation: and how crude cross-country measurement will be likely to distort the reality in the setting of the US. • This means that contextual case studies, with all of their detail, can help to elaborate key concepts. • And that all cases are context specific... but this lies beyond the canon on measurement that preoccupies American political science.

More Related