Comparative Politics I. Introductory notes. Methodological notes

1. Comparative Politics I. Introductory notes.Methodological notes Luca Verzichelli / Alessandro Chiaramonte Comparative PoliticalInstitutions Academicyear 2016 - 2017

2. About the course Student profile 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 • 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

3. 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

4. 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 …

5. Comparative politics: method or discipline per se? • Classicsworks (Toquevilleto Wilson) based on the “logicofcomparison” (Mills) without a clear focus on the target of comparative exercise • Then, long story ofconsolidationof a (sub)discipline of PS based on (1) a statutorymission: providing a comprehensiveexplanationofpoliticalphenomena, (2) a scientificambition: working on non-sperimentalscientificenvironment, and keeping a specific and sophisticated method in orderto test hypothesesconcerning the varianceamongpoliticalsystems. • Steppingstonesafter IIWW - Easton (1956): political system as a unitofanalysis - Almond and Powell (1966): howtoovercome the provincialism in applying the system theorybasingourinference on comparisons at the levelofanalysisofpolitical system - Sartori (1970/1991): comparinginsteadofmiscomparing (conceptual stretching, degreeism, misclassification, parochialism) - Lijphart (1971): selectionof case(s) tobestudied - Ragin (1994): Constructing social research. QCA and the approachof qualitative comparison

6. Lijparth 1971: howtominimize the“toomanyvariable/small N problem” Lijphart, A. 1971. Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review 65 (Sept): 682-93. • Increase the numberofcasesasmuchaspossible • Reduce the property-spaceof the analysis • Focus the comparative analysis on comparative cases • Focus the comparative analysis on the key variables

7. Sartori: typical miscomparisons • Conceptual stretching: A book titledCoalitionpolitics in the US. Be carefullwith the useofgivenexpressions • Degreeism: whofixes 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, excessivereliance in countrybasedinferencesand ignoranceon the overallphenomena

8. 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

9. Methods of comparative analysis • Progressive identificationbetween the idea ofapplicationofcomparative method(s) and comparative politics… • … butthisimplies a dynamicoftransformationof the “mission” of comparative politics(Fabbrini/Molutsi 2011)

10. We are all comparatists now (Lees 2006)Evidences from professional consolidation of PS • Mostof top PS journal are truly comparative or “specialised” but open to comparative analyses • Books on single countries are nowmuchlessrelevant Therefore • Relative isolationof the single-countrycanon • Necessary innovative and carefuluseof case study design (Gerring)

11. Comparative politicstheoriesthe 3 neo-institutionalisms • Rational choice institutionalism • Historical institutionalism • Sociological institutionalism

12. Comparative politicstheoriesthe 3 neo-institutionalisms (Hall) • Historicalinstitutionalism: Background: response to group theory of politics and structural-functionalism. 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: sedimentationofsimilarcollectiveinstitutions, based on sharedvalues • Rationalchoiceinstitutionalism Samedefinitionofinstitutionsbutemphasis on the role of strategic interactions and individual behaviours. Trend: diffusionofmodelofinstitutionalsettingsbased on dominantviews (methodologicindividualism). Later, a second generation of “non institution-free” rationalneo-institutionalism • Sociologicalinstitutionalism Key variable: ‘social appropriateness’ of given institutional arrangements (but not others). Institutional arrangements thus vary depending on cultural and contextual variables.

13. Issuesofcurrent 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