comparative case study politics

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

51 The Case Study: What it is and What it Does

John Gerring is Professor of Political Science, Boston University.

• Published: 05 September 2013
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This article presents a reconstructed definition of the case study approach to research. This definition emphasizes comparative politics, which has been closely linked to this method since its creation. The article uses this definition as a basis to explore a series of contrasts between cross-case study and case study research. This article attempts to provide better understanding of this persisting methodological debate as a matter of tradeoffs, which may also contribute to destroying the boundaries that have separated these rival genres within the subfield of comparative politics.

Two centuries after Le Play’s pioneering work, the various disciplines of the social sciences continue to produce a vast number of case studies, many of which have entered the pantheon of classic works. Judging by the large volume of recent scholarly output the case study research design plays a central role in anthropology, archeology, business, education, history, medicine, political science, psychology, social work, and sociology (Gerring 2007 a , ch. 1 ). Even in economics and political economy, fields not usually noted for their receptiveness to case-based work, there has been something of a renaissance. Recent studies of economic growth have turned to case studies of unusual countries such as Botswana, Korea, and Mauritius. 1 Debates on the relationship between trade and growth and the IMF and growth have likewise combined cross-national regression evidence with in-depth (quantitativ and qualitative) case analysis ( Srinivasan and Bhagwati 1999 ; Vreeland 2003 ). Work on ethnic politics and ethnic conflict has exploited within-country variation or small-N cross-country comparisons ( Abadie and Gardeazabal 2003 ; Chandra 2004 ; Posner 2004 ). By the standard of praxis, therefore, it would appear that the method of the case study is solidly ensconced, perhaps even thriving. Arguably, we are witnessing a movement away from a variable-centered approach to causality in the social sciences and towards a case-based approach.

Indeed, the statistical analysis of cross-case observational data has been subjected to increasing scrutiny in recent years. It no longer seems self-evident, even to nomothetically inclined scholars, that non-experimental data drawn from nation-states, cities, social movements, civil conflicts, or other complex phenomena should be treated in standard regression formats. The complaints are myriad, and oftreviewed. 2 They include: (a) the problem of arriving at an adequate specification of the causal model, given a plethora of plausible models, and the associated problem of modeling interactions among these covariates; (b) identification problems, which cannot always be corrected by instrumental variable techniques; (c) the problem of “extreme” counterfactuals, i.e. extrapolating or interpolating results from a general model where the extrapolations extend beyond the observable data points; (d) problems posed by influential cases; (e) the arbitrariness of standard significance tests; (f) the misleading precision of point estimates in the context of “curve-fitting” models; (g) the problem of finding an appropriate estimator and modeling temporal autocorrelation in pooled time series; (h) the difficulty of identifying causal mechanisms; and last, but certainly not least, (i) the ubiquitous problem of faulty data drawn from a variety of questionable sources. Most of these difficulties may be understood as the by-product of causal variables that offer limited variation through time and cases that are extremely heterogeneous.

A principal factor driving the general discontent with cross-case observational research is a new-found interest in experimental models of social scientific research. Following the pioneering work of Donald Campbell (1988 ; Cook and Campbell 1979 ) and Donald Rubin (1974) , methodologists have taken a hard look at the regression model and discovered something rather obvious but at the same time crucially important: this research bears only a faint relationship to the true experiment, for all the reasons noted above. The current excitement generated by matching estimators, natural experiments, and field experiments may be understood as a move toward a quasi-experimental, and frequently case-based analysis of causal relations. Arguably, this is because the experimental ideal is often better approximated by a small number of cases that are closely related to one another, or by a single case observed over time, than by a large sample of heterogeneous units.

A third factor militating towards case-based analysis is the development of a series of alternatives to the standard linear/additive model of cross-case analysis, thus establishing a more variegated set of tools to capture the complexity of social behavior (see Brady and Collier 2004 ). Charles Ragin and associates have shown us how to deal with situations where multiple causal paths lead to the same set of outcomes, a series of techniques known as Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) (“Symposium: Qualitative Comparative Analysis” 2004). Andrew Abbott has worked out a method that maps causal sequences across cases, known as optimal sequence matching ( Abbott 2001 ; Abbott and Forrest 1986 ; Abbott and Tsay 2000 ). Bear Braumoeller, Gary Goertz, Jack Levy, and Harvey Starr have defended the importance of necessary-condition arguments in the social sciences, and have shown how these arguments might be analyzed ( Braumoeller and Goertz 2000 ; Goertz 2003 ; Goertz and Levy forthcoming; Goertz and Starr 2003 ). James Fearon, Ned Lebow, Philip Tetlock, and others have explored the role of counterfactual thought experiments in the analysis of individual case histories ( Fearon 1991 ; Lebow 2000 ; Tetlock and Belkin 1996 ). Colin Elman has developed a typological method of analyzing cases ( Elman 2005 ). David Collier, Jack Goldstone, Peter Hall, James Mahoney, and Dietrich Rueschemeyer have worked to revitalize the comparative and comparative-historical methods ( Collier 1993 ; Goldstone 1997 ; Hall 2003 ; Mahoney and Rueschemeyer 2003 ). And scores of researchers have attacked the problem of how to convert the relevant details of a temporally constructed narrative into standardized formats so that cases can be meaningfully compared (Abell 1987 , 2004 ; Abbott 1992 ; Buthe 2002 ; Griffin 1993 ). While not all of these techniques are, strictly speaking, case study techniques—since they sometimes involve a large number of cases—they do move us closer to a case-based understanding of causation insofar as they preserve the texture and detail of individual cases, features that are often lost in large-N cross-case analysis.

A fourth factor concerns the recent marriage of rational choice tools with case study analysis, sometimes referred to as an “analytic narrative” ( Bates et al. 1998 ). Whether the technique is qualitative or quantitative, scholars equipped with economic models are turning, increasingly, to case studies in order to test the theoretical predictions of a general model, investigate causal mechanisms, and/or explain the features of a key case.

Finally, epistemological shifts in recent decades have enhanced the attractiveness of the case study format. The “positivist” model of explanation, which informed work in the social sciences through most of the twentieth century, tended to downplay the importance of causal mechanisms in the analysis of causal relations. Famously, Milton Friedman (1953) argued that the only criterion of a model was to be found in its accurate prediction of outcomes. The verisimilitude of the model, its accurate depiction of reality, was beside the point. In recent years, this explanatory trope has come under challenge from “realists,” who claim (among other things) that causal analysis should pay close attention to causal mechanisms (e.g. Bunge 1997 ; Little 1998 ). Within political science and sociology, the identification of a specific mechanism—a causal pathway—has come to be seen as integral to causal analysis, regardless of whether the model in question is formal or informal or whether the evidence is qualitative or quantitative ( Achen 2002 ; Elster 1998 ; George and Bennett 2005 ; Hedstrom and Swedberg 1998 ). Given this new-found (or at least newly self-conscious) interest in mechanisms, it is not surprising that social scientists would turn to case studies as a mode of causal investigation.

For all the reasons stated above, one might intuit that social science is moving towards a case-based understanding of causal relations. Yet, this movement, insofar as it exists, has scarcely been acknowledged, and would certainly be challenged by many close observers—including some of those cited in the foregoing passages.

The fact is that the case study research design is still viewed by most methodologists with extreme circumspection. A work that focuses its attention on a single example of a broader phenomenon is apt to be described as a “mere” case study, and is often identified with loosely framed and non-generalizable theories, biased case selection, informal and undisciplined research designs, weak empirical leverage (too many variables and too few cases), subjective conclusions, non-replicability, and causal determinism. To some, the term case study is an ambiguous designation covering a multitude of “inferential felonies.” 3

The quasi-mystical qualities associated with the case study persist to this day. In the field of psychology, a gulf separates “scientists” engaged in cross-case research and “practitioners” engaged in clinical research, usually focused on several cases ( Hersen and Barlow 1976 , 21). In the fields of political science and sociology, case study researchers are acknowledged to be on the “soft” side of hard disciplines. And across fields, the persisting case study orientations of anthropology, education, law, social work, and various other fields and subfields relegate them to the non-rigorous, non-systematic, non-scientific, non-positivist end of the academic spectrum.

The methodological status of the case study is still, officially, suspect. Even among its defenders there is confusion over the virtues and vices of this ambiguous research design. Practitioners continue to ply their trade but have difficulty articulating what it is they are doing, methodologically speaking. The case study survives in a curious methodological limbo.

This leads to a paradox: although much of what we know about the empirical world has been generated by case studies and case studies continue to constitute a large proportion of work generated by the social science disciplines, the case study method is poorly understood.

How can we make sense of the profound disjuncture between the acknowledged contributions of this genre to the various disciplines of social science and its maligned status within these disciplines? If case studies are methodologically flawed, why do they persist? Should they be rehabilitated, or suppressed? How fruitful is this style of research?

In this chapter, I provide a reconstructed definition of the case study approach to research with special emphasis on comparative politics, a field that has been closely identified with this method since its birth. Based on this definition, I then explore a series of contrasts between case study and cross-case study research. These contrasts are intended to illuminate the characteristic strengths and weaknesses (“affinities”) of these two research designs, not to vindicate one or the other. The effort of this chapter is to understand this persisting methodological debate as a matter of tradeoffs. Case studies and cross-case studies explore the world in different ways. Yet, properly constituted, there is no reason that case study results cannot be synthesized with results gained from cross-case analysis, and vice versa. My hope, therefore, is that this chapter will contribute to breaking down the boundaries that have separated these rival genres within the subfield of comparative politics.

1 Definitions

The key term of this chapter is, admittedly, a definitional morass. To refer to a work as a “case study” might mean: that its method is qualitative, small-N; that the research is holistic, thick (a more or less comprehensive examination of a phenomenon); that it utilizes a particular type of evidence (e.g. ethnographic, clinical, non-experimental, non-survey based, participant observation, process tracing, historical, textual, or field research); that its method of evidence gathering is naturalistic (a “real-life context”); that the research investigates the properties of a single observation; or that the research investigates the properties of a single phenomenon, instance, or example. Evidently, researchers have many things in mind when they talk about case study research. Confusion is compounded by the existence of a large number of near-synonyms—single unit, single subject, single case, N = 1, case based, case control, case history, case method, case record, case work, clinical research, and so forth. As a result of this profusion of terms and meanings, proponents and opponents of the case study marshal a wide range of arguments but do not seem any closer to agreement than when this debate was first broached several decades ago.

Can we reconstruct this concept in a clearer, more productive fashion? In order to do so we must understand how the key terms—case and case study—are situated within a neighborhood of related terms. In this crowded semantic field, each term is defined in relation to others. And in the context of a specific work or research terrain, they all take their meaning from a specific inference. (The reader should bear in mind that any change in the inference, and the meaning of all the key terms will probably change.) My attempt here will be to provide a single, determinate, definition of these key terms. Of course, researchers may choose to define these terms in many different ways. However, for purposes of methodological discussion it is helpful to enforce a uniform vocabulary.

Let us stipulate that a case connotes a spatially delimited phenomenon (a unit) observed at a single point in time or over some period of time. It comprises the sort of phenomena that an inference attempts to explain. Thus, in a study that attempts to explain certain features of nation-states, cases are comprised of nation-states (across some temporal frame). In a study that attempts to explain the behavior of individuals, individuals comprise the cases. And so forth. Each case may provide a single observation or multiple (within-case) observations.

For students of comparative politics, the archetypal case is the dominant political unit of our time, the nation-state. However, the study of smaller social and political units (regions, cities, villages, communities, social groups, families) or specific institutions (political parties, interest groups, businesses) is equally common in other subfields, and perhaps increasingly so in comparative politics. Whatever the chosen unit, the methodological issues attached to the case study have nothing to do with the size of the individual cases. A case may be created out of any phenomenon so long as it has identifiable boundaries and comprises the primary object of an inference.

Note that the spatial boundaries of a case are often more apparent than its temporal boundaries. We know, more or less, where a country begins and ends, even though we may have difficulty explaining when a country begins and ends. Yet, some temporal boundaries must be assumed. This is particularly important when cases consist of discrete events—crises, revolutions, legislative acts, and so forth—within a single unit. Occasionally, the temporal boundaries of a case are more obvious than its spatial boundaries. This is true when the phenomena under study are eventful but the unit undergoing the event is amorphous. For example, if one is studying terrorist attacks it may not be clear how the spatial unit of analysis should be understood, but the events themselves may be well bounded.

A case study may be understood as the intensive study of a single case for the purpose of understanding a larger class of cases (a population). Case study research may incorporate several cases. However, at a certain point it will no longer be possible to investigate those cases intensively. At the point where the emphasis of a study shifts from the individual case to a sample of cases we shall say that a study is cross-case . Evidently, the distinction between a case study and cross-case study is a continuum. The fewer cases there are, and the more intensively they are studied, the more a work merits the appellation case study. Even so, this proves to be a useful distinction, for much follows from it.

A few additional terms will now be formally defined.

An observation is the most basic element of any empirical endeavor. Conventionally, the number of observations in an analysis is referred to with the letter N . (Confusingly, N may also be used to designate the number of cases in a study, a usage that I shall try to avoid.) A single observation may be understood as containing several dimensions, each of which may be measured (across disparate observations) as a variable. Where the proposition is causal, these may be subdivided into dependent (Y) and independent (X) variables. The dependent variable refers to the outcome of an investigation. The independent variable refers to the explanatory (causal) factor, that which the outcome is supposedly dependent on.

Note that a case may consist of a single observation (N = 1). This would be true, for example, in a cross-sectional analysis of multiple cases. In a case study, however, the case under study always provides more than one observation. These may be constructed diachronically (by observing the case or some subset of within-case units through time) or synchronically (by observing within-case variation at a single point in time).

This is a clue to the fact that case studies and cross-case usually operate at different levels of analysis. The case study is typically focused on within-case variation (if there a cross-case component it is probably secondary). The cross-case study, as the name suggests, is typically focused on cross-case variation (if there is also within-case variation, it is secondary in importance). They have the same object in view—the explanation of a population of cases—but they go about this task differently.

A sample consists of whatever cases are subjected to formal analysis; they are the immediate subject of a study or case study. (Confusingly, the sample may also refer to the observations under study, and will be so used at various points in this narrative. But at present, we treat the sample as consisting of cases.) Technically, one might say that in a case study the sample consists of the case or cases that are subjected to intensive study. However, usually when one uses the term sample one is implying that the number of cases is rather large. Thus, “sample-based work” will be understood as referring to large-N cross-case methods—the opposite of case study work. Again, the only feature distinguishing the case study format from a sample-based (or “cross-case”) research design is the number of cases falling within the sample—one or a few versus many. Case studies, like large-N samples, seek to represent, in all ways relevant to the proposition at hand, a population of cases. A series of case studies might therefore be referred to as a sample if they are relatively brief and relatively numerous; it is a matter of emphasis and of degree. The more case studies one has, the less intensively each one is studied, and the more confident one is in their representativeness (of some broader population), the more likely one is to describe them as a sample rather than a series of case studies. For practical reasons—unless, that is, a study is extraordinarily long—the case study research format is usually limited to a dozen cases or less. A single case is not at all unusual.

The sample rests within a population of cases to which a given proposition refers. The population of an inference is thus equivalent to the breadth or scope of a proposition. (I use the terms proposition , hypothesis , inference , and argument interchangeably.) Note that most samples are not exhaustive; hence the use of the term sample, referring to sampling from a population. Occasionally, however, the sample equals the population of an inference; all potential cases are studied.

For those familiar with the rectangular form of a dataset it may be helpful to conceptualize observations as rows, variables as columns, and cases as either groups of observations or individual observations.

2 What is a Case Study Good For? Case Study versus Cross-case Analysis

I have argued that the case study approach to research is most usefully defined as the intensive study of a single unit or a small number of units (the cases), for the purpose of understanding a larger class of similar units (a population of cases). This is put forth as a minimal definition of the topic. 4 I now proceed to discuss the non -definitional attributes of the case study—attributes that are often, but not invariably, associated with the case study method. These will be understood as methodological affinities flowing from a minimal definition of the concept. 5

The case study research design exhibits characteristic strengths and weaknesses relative to its large-N cross-case cousin. These tradeoffs derive, first of all, from basic research goals such as (1) whether the study is oriented toward hypothesis generating or hypothesis testing, (2) whether internal or external validity is prioritized, (3) whether insight into causal mechanisms or causal effects is more valuable, and (4) whether the scope of the causal inference is deep or broad. These tradeoffs also hinge on the shape of the empirical universe, i.e. (5) whether the population of cases under study is heterogeneous or homogeneous, (6) whether the causal relationship of interest is strong or weak, (7) whether useful variation on key parameters within that population is rare or common, and (8) whether available data are concentrated or dispersed.

Along each of these dimensions, case study research has an affinity for the first factor and cross-case research has an affinity for the second, as summarized in Table 51.1 . To clarify, these tradeoffs represent methodological affinities , not invariant laws. Exceptions can be found to each one. Even so, these general tendencies are often noted in case study research and have been reproduced in multiple disciplines and subdisciplines over the course of many decades.

It should be stressed that each of these tradeoffs carries a ceteris paribus caveat. Case studies are more useful for generating new hypotheses, all other things being equal . The reader must bear in mind that many additional factors also rightly influence a writer’s choice of research design, and they may lean in the other direction. Ceteris are not always paribus. One should not jump to conclusions about the research design appropriate to a given setting without considering the entire range of issues involved—some of which may be more important than others.

3 Hypothesis: Generating versus Testing

Social science research involves a quest for new theories as well as a testing of existing theories; it is comprised of both “conjectures” and “refutations.” 6 Regrettably, social science methodology has focused almost exclusively on the latter. The conjectural element of social science is usually dismissed as a matter of guesswork, inspiration, or luck—a leap of faith, and hence a poor subject for methodological reflection. 7 Yet, it will readily be granted that many works of social science, including most of the acknowledged classics, are seminal rather than definitive. Their classic status derives from the introduction of a new idea or a new perspective that is subsequently subjected to more rigorous (and refutable) analysis. Indeed, it is difficult to devise a program of falsification the first time a new theory is proposed. Path-breaking research, almost by definition, is protean. Subsequent research on that topic tends to be more definitive insofar as its primary task is limited: to verify or falsify a pre-existing hypothesis. Thus, the world of social science may be usefully divided according to the predominant goal undertaken in a given study, either hypothesis generating or hypothesis testing . There are two moments of empirical research, a lightbulb moment and a skeptical moment, each of which is essential to the progress of a discipline. 8

Case studies enjoy a natural advantage in research of an exploratory nature. Several millennia ago, Hippocrates reported what were, arguably, the first case studies ever conducted. They were fourteen in number. 9 Darwin’s insights into the process of human evolution came after his travels to a few select locations, notably Easter Island. Freud’s revolutionary work on human psychology was constructed from a close observation of fewer than a dozen clinical cases. Piaget formulated his theory of human cognitive development while watching his own two children as they passed from childhood to adulthood. Lévi-Strauss’s structuralist theory of human cultures built on the analysis of several North and South American tribes. Douglass North’s neo-institutionalist theory of economic development was constructed largely through a close analysis of a handful of early developing states (primarily England, the Netherlands, and the United States). 10 Many other examples might be cited of seminal ideas that derived from the intensive study of a few key cases.

Evidently, the sheer number of examples of a given phenomenon does not, by itself, produce insight. It may only confuse. How many times did Newton observe apples fall before he recognized the nature of gravity? This is an apocryphal example, but it illustrates a central point: case studies may be more useful than cross-case studies when a subject is being encountered for the first time or is being considered in a fundamentally new way. After reviewing the case study approach to medical research, one researcher finds that although case reports are commonly regarded as the lowest or weakest form of evidence, they are nonetheless understood to comprise “the first line of evidence.” The hallmark of case reporting, according to Jan Vandenbroucke, “is to recognize the unexpected.” This is where discovery begins. 11

The advantages that case studies offer in work of an exploratory nature may also serve as impediments in work of a confirmatory/disconfirmatory nature. Let us briefly explore why this might be so. 12

Traditionally, scientific methodology has been defined by a segregation of conjecture and refutation. One should not be allowed to contaminate the other. 13 Yet, in the real world of social science, inspiration is often associated with perspiration. “Lightbulb” moments arise from a close engagement with the particular facts of a particular case. Inspiration is more likely to occur in the laboratory than in the shower.

The circular quality of conjecture and refutation is particularly apparent in case study research. Charles Ragin notes that case study research is all about “casing”—defining the topic, including the hypothesis(es) of primary interest, the outcome, and the set of cases that offer relevant information vis-à-vis the hypothesis. 14 A study of the French Revolution may be conceptualized as a study of revolution, of social revolution, of revolt, of political violence, and so forth. Each of these topics entails a different population and a different set of causal factors. A good deal of authorial intervention is necessary in the course of defining a case study topic, for there is a great deal of evidentiary leeway. Yet, the “subjectivity” of case study research allows for the generation of a great number of hypotheses, insights that might not be apparent to the cross-case researcher who works with a thinner set of empirical data across a large number of cases and with a more determinate (fixed) definition of cases, variables, and outcomes. It is the very fuzziness of case studies that grants them an advantage in research at the exploratory stage, for the single-case study allows one to test a multitude of hypotheses in a rough-and-ready way. Nor is this an entirely “conjectural” process. The relationships discovered among different elements of a single case have a prima facie causal connection: they are all at the scene of the crime. This is revelatory when one is at an early stage of analysis, for at that point there is no identifiable suspect and the crime itself may be difficult to discern. The fact that A , B , and C are present at the expected times and places (relative to some outcome of interest) is sufficient to establish them as independent variables. Proximal evidence is all that is required. Hence, the common identification of case studies as “plausibility probes,” “pilot studies,” “heuristic studies,” “exploratory” and “theory-building” exercises. 15

A large-N cross-study, by contrast, generally allows for the testing of only a few hypotheses but does so with a somewhat greater degree of confidence, as is appropriate to work whose primary purpose is to test an extant theory. There is less room for authorial intervention because evidence gathered from a cross-case research design can be interpreted in a limited number of ways. It is therefore more reliable. Another way of stating the point is to say that while case studies lean toward Type 1 errors (falsely rejecting the null hypothesis), cross-case studies lean toward Type 2 errors (failing to reject the false null hypothesis). This explains why case studies are more likely to be paradigm generating, while cross-case studies toil in the prosaic but highly structured field of normal science.

I do not mean to suggest that case studies never serve to confirm or disconfirm hypotheses. Evidence drawn from a single case may falsify a necessary or sufficient hypothesis, as discussed below. Additionally, case studies are often useful for the purpose of elucidating causal mechanisms, and this obviously affects the plausibility of an X/Y relationship. However, general theories rarely offer the kind of detailed and determinate predictions on within-case variation that would allow one to reject a hypothesis through pattern matching (without additional cross-case evidence). Theory testing is not the case study’s strong suit. The selection of “crucial” cases is at pains to overcome the fact that the cross-case N is minimal. Thus, one is unlikely to reject a hypothesis, or to consider it definitively proved, on the basis of the study of a single case.

Harry Eckstein himself acknowledges that his argument for case studies as a form of theory confirmation is largely hypothetical. At the time of writing, several decades ago, he could not point to any social science study where a crucial case study had performed the heroic role assigned to it. 16 I suspect that this is still more or less true. Indeed, it is true even of experimental case studies in the natural sciences. “We must recognize,” note Donald Campbell and Julian Stanley,

that continuous, multiple experimentation is more typical of science than once-and-for-all definitive experiments. The experiments we do today, if successful, will need replication and cross-validation at other times under other conditions before they can become an established part of science … [E]ven though we recognize experimentation as the basic language of proof … we should not expect that “crucial experiments” which pit opposing theories will be likely to have clear-cut outcomes. When one finds, for example, that competent observers advocate strongly divergent points of view, it seems likely on a priori grounds that both have observed something valid about the natural situation, and that both represent a part of the truth. The stronger the controversy, the more likely this is. Thus we might expect in such cases an experimental outcome with mixed results, or with the balance of truth varying subtly from experiment to experiment. The more mature focus…avoids crucial experiments and instead studies dimensional relationships and interactions along many degrees of the experimental variables. 17

A single case study is still a single shot—a single example of a larger phenomenon.

The tradeoff between hypothesis generating and hypothesis testing helps us to reconcile the enthusiasm of case study researchers and the skepticism of case study critics. They are both right, for the looseness of case study research is a boon to new conceptualizations just as it is a bane to falsification.

4 Validity: Internal versus External

Questions of validity are often distinguished according to those that are internal to the sample under study and those that are external (i.e. applying to a broader—unstudied—population). Cross-case research is always more representative of the population of interest than case study research, so long as some sensible procedure of case selection is followed (presumably some version of random sampling). Case study research suffers problems of representativeness because it includes, by definition, only a small number of cases of some more general phenomenon. Are the men chosen by Robert Lane typical of white, immigrant, working-class, American males? 18 Is Middletown representative of other cities in America? 19 These sorts of questions forever haunt case study research. This means that case study research is generally weaker with respect to external validity than its cross-case cousin.

The corresponding virtue of case study research is its internal validity. Often, though not invariably, it is easier to establish the veracity of a causal relationship pertaining to a single case (or a small number of cases) than for a larger set of cases. Case study researchers share the bias of experimentalists in this regard: they tend to be more disturbed by threats to within-sample validity than by threats to out-of-sample validity. Thus, it seems appropriate to regard the tradeoff between external and internal validity, like other tradeoffs, as intrinsic to the cross-case/single-case choice of research design.

5 Causal Insight: Causal Mechanisms versus Causal Effects

A third tradeoff concerns the sort of insight into causation that a researcher intends to achieve. Two goals may be usefully distinguished. The first concerns an estimate of the causal effect ; the second concerns the investigation of a causal mechanism (i.e. pathway from X to Y).

By causal effect I refer to two things: (a) the magnitude of a causal relationship (the expected effect on Y of a given change in X across a population of cases) and (b) the relative precision or uncertainty associated with that point estimate. Evidently, it is difficult to arrive at a reliable estimate of causal effects across a population of cases by looking at only a single case or a small number of cases. (The one exception would be an experiment in which a given case can be tested repeatedly, returning to a virgin condition after each test. But here one faces inevitable questions about the representativeness of that much-studied case.) 20 Thus, the estimate of a causal effect is almost always grounded in cross-case evidence.

It is now well established that causal arguments depend not only on measuring causal effects, but also on the identification of a causal mechanism. 21   X must be connected with Y in a plausible fashion; otherwise, it is unclear whether a pattern of covariation is truly causal in nature, or what the causal interaction might be. Moreover, without a clear understanding of the causal pathway(s) at work in a causal relationship it is impossible to accurately specify the model, to identify possible instruments for the regressor of interest (if there are problems of endogeneity), or to interpret the results. 22 Thus, causal mechanisms are presumed in every estimate of a mean (average) causal effect.

In the task of investigating causal mechanisms, cross-case studies are often not so illuminating. It has become a common criticism of large-N cross-national research—e.g. into the causes of growth, democracy, civil war, and other national-level outcomes—that such studies demonstrate correlations between inputs and outputs without clarifying the reasons for those correlations (i.e. clear causal pathways). We learn, for example, that infant mortality is strongly correlated with state failure; 23 but it is quite another matter to interpret this finding, which is consistent with a number of different causal mechanisms. Sudden increases in infant mortality might be the product of famine, of social unrest, of new disease vectors, of government repression, and of countless other factors, some of which might be expected to impact the stability of states, and others of which are more likely to be a result of state instability.

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Introducing Comparative Politics Concepts and Cases in Context

• Stephen Orvis - Hamilton College, USA
• Carol Ann Drogus - Colgate University, USA
• Description
• Assignable Video with Assessment Assignable video (available in Sage Vantage ) is tied to learning objectives and curated exclusively for this text to bring concepts to life.
• LMS Cartridge : Import this title’s instructor resources into your school’s learning management system (LMS) and save time. Don't use an LMS? You can still access all of the same online resources for this title via the password-protected Instructor Resource Site. Learn more .

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

Supplements

• Editable chapter-specific PowerPoint® slides
• Sample course syllabi
• Lecture notes
• All tables and figures from the textbook

"A solid textbook on the major topics in comparative politics that integrates case studies, most of which are recurring, in each chapter."

"A theoretically-motivated but approachable introduction to comparative politics."

"The graphics in the book are extremely reader-friendly. The language is clear and easy for students to follow. Instructor resources are quite helpful (and a key part of my decision-making). Overall, this is the best comparative politics text for undergrads that I have found. It covers all the important topics in the field and presents them in a way that is accessible to students."

"An excellent resource for the political scientist who is teaching comparative politics for the first time."

"Orvis and Drogus have authored a comprehensive and up-to-date introduction to comparative politics which will engage today's undergraduates."

"In depth case studies and analysis of particular topics in comparative politics"

"This is a great introductory comparative politics text for both majors and non-majors. The material is accessible for non-discipline students, and easily lends itself to connections with other academic disciplines. The structure of the content is flexible enough to allow for the integration of current events."

What a fantastic book! It has great case studies that are very contemporary and lots of relevant discussions on things my students are really interested in, like political protest and identity politics. All the resources, like slides and lecture notes, are great, and I'm able to use those quite effectively in my classes. This book has nailed what comparative politics is all about.

• The new edition is available in Sage Vantage , an intuitive learning platform that integrates quality Sage textbook content with assignable multimedia activities and auto-graded assessments to drive student engagement and ensure accountability. Unparalleled in its ease of use and built for dynamic teaching and learning, Vantage offers customizable LMS integration and best-in-class support. Learn more .
• Chapter 6 includes an expanded section on the global rise of populism.
• A new case study in chapter 7 looks at Black Lives Matter as a social movement.
• Chapter 10 has been substantially reorganized to clarify the debate over globalization and varieties of capitalism .
• Effects of the global coronavirus pandemic are incorporated throughout the book.
• Throughout the book, case studies have been updated to include the most recent political developments .
• Core country case studies are introduced in Chapter 1 and then revisited throughout the book, allowing instructors to tie multiple case studies to one theory or concept. The case studies include coverage of Brazil, China, Germany, Japan, India, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Each case includes a Case Synopsis at the beginning to improve student comprehension of the material.
• In Context fact boxes put case studies and data into regional context.
• Critical Inquiry features in every chapter highlight methodological issues in comparative politics, providing a gateway for empirical study and analysis.
• A Country and Concept table in each chapter displays key indicators for core countries to offer at-a-glance context and comparison.
• More than a hundred full color tables, figures, and maps help students visualize comparative data and better understand concepts.
• Chapter-opening key questions, a marginal glossary, as well as end-of-chapter lists of key concepts , works cited, suggested reading, and web resources help students review, research, and study.

Preview this book

Sample materials & chapters.

Chapter 1. Introduction

Chapter 2. The Modern State

For instructors

Select a purchasing option, related products.

An Open Education Resource Textbook

Welcome to the official home of Introduction to Comparative Government and Politics, a new Open Education Resources (OER) textbook, written by Dr. Dino Bozonelos, Dr. Julia Wendt, Dr. Charlotte Lee, Jessica Scarffe, Dr. Masahiro Omae, Dr. Josh Franco, Dr. Byran Martin, and Stefan Veldhuis.

Introduction to Comparative Government and Politics is the first open educational resource (OER) on the topic of comparative politics, and the second OER textbook in political science funded by ASCCC OERI, in what we hope will become a complete library for the discipline. This textbook aligns with the C-ID Course Descriptor for Introduction to Comparative Government and Politics in content and objectives.

With chapter contributions from Dr. Julia Wendt at Victor Valley College, Dr. Charlotte Lee at Berkeley City College, Jessica Scarffe at Allan Hancock College, Dr. Masahiro Omae at San Diego City College, Dr. Josue Franco at Cuyamaca College, Stefan Veldhuis at Long Beach City College, Dr. Byran Martin at Houston Community College, and myself, the purpose of this open education resource is to provide students interested in or majoring in political science a useful textbook in comparative politics, one of the major subfields in the discipline.

It is organized thematically, with each chapter accompanied by a case study or a comparative study, one of the main methodological tools used in comparative politics. By contextualizing the concepts, we hope to help students learn the comparative method, which to this day remains one of the most important methodological tools for all researchers.

I chose to pursue this project as I felt that an OER textbook in comparative politics would otherwise never have been written. After many years of teaching at a community college, my colleagues and I realized a need existed for a zero-cost textbook. With the rising costs of education and textbooks, community college students may be deterred from exploring political science courses. I believe that this is where the next elected leader, policymaker or military strategist needs to come from. This is a grassroots textbook, written with these and future community college students in mind.

This open education resource is free to students and faculty and available under the Creative Commons – Attribution – Noncommercial (CC BY-NC) license. We hope that it will encourage them further their studies in comparative politics and in political science.

Dino Bozonelos, Ph.D. May 2022

• Faculty of Arts and Sciences
• FAS Scholarly Articles
• Communities & Collections
• By Issue Date
• FAS Department
• Quick submit
• Waiver Generator
• DASH Stories
• Accessibility
• COVID-related Research
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• By Collections
• By Departments

Show simple item record

Evidence Based Public Policy Making: A Comparative Case Study Analysis

Files in this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

• FAS Scholarly Articles [18295]

POLSC221: Introduction to Comparative Politics

POLSC221 Study Guide

Unit 7: comparative case studies, 7a. describe and explain the political economy and development in selected regions and countries.

• How did the countries in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia develop politically and economically?
• How have the economic challenges each country faced influenced the political and economic development of each respective country and region?
• How did their respective political structures impact their economic development? For example, why do you think states in Asia and the Middle East have been more successful in managing economic development, than those in Africa and Latin America?
• What are some of the broad regional patterns that have promoted economic development?
• How do these patterns differ among the countries in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia?

Comparing and contrasting one country's political economy and development with another involves examining the evolution of each nation's respective political system, economic development, international trade, and the internal distribution of its national income and wealth.

To review, see Comparative Case Studies .

7b. Identify and explain political challenges and changing agendas in selected regions and countries

• How have their past colonial experiences impacted political and economic development in the states that make up Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia?
• How has an abundance of economically valuable natural resources brought benefits and disadvantages to the states in these regions?
• How has the persistent robust trade in illegal drugs impacted the politics of the states in these regions?
• How have economic programs, such as cash transfers and microfinancing , benefited the people who live in the states in these regions?
• How have international treaties, such as NAFTA, impacted political and economic development in Mexico, the United States, and Canada, and the other states in these regions?

Politicians in many developing states face the challenge of managing past economic and political legacies as they navigate a world that is experiencing rapid change and growth, such as new technological infrastructure, population growth, and economic opportunities. Some countries, such as those in East Asia and the Middle East have experienced rapid economic growth, while others, such as those in Africa and Latin America, continue to struggle with political conflict, violence, and economic inequalities.

Unit 7 Vocabulary

• Cash transfers
• Colonialism
• Foreign direct investment
• Import substitution industrialization
• Microfinance
• North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

10.4: Comparative Case Study - Barometers Around the World

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 135877

• Dino Bozonelos, Julia Wendt, Charlotte Lee, Jessica Scarffe, Masahiro Omae, Josh Franco, Byran Martin, & Stefan Veldhuis
• Victor Valley College, Berkeley City College, Allan Hancock College, San Diego City College, Cuyamaca College, Houston Community College, and Long Beach City College via ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Remember the definition of a barometer
• Analyze at least two different barometers
• Evaluate the similarities and differences between two or more barometers

Introduction

Recall from the beginning of the chapter that comparative public opinion is the research and analysis of public opinion across two or more countries.The case study for this chapter is a comparison of global or regional public opinion surveys, also called barometers. Also remember from Chapter Two, that cases in comparative politics are mostly countries. Here is a comparative case study where the cases are not countries, but instead barometers.

What is a barometer?

A barometer is typically defined as “an instrument for determining the pressure of the atmosphere and hence for assisting in forecasting weather and for determining altitude.” However, when political scientists use the term barometer, we are referring to a survey of questions that are asked of individuals in a particular country or region of the world, to gauge their opinions on political ideas, institutions, and actors.

Barometers Around the World

Eight well known barometers include: Afrobarometer, Arab Barometer, Asian Barometer, Eurasia Barometer, Latino Barometer, Comparative National Elections Project, AmericasBarometer, and World Values Survey. Below is a table that summarizes the year, geographic coverage, and website for each of these barometers.

According to its website, the Afrobarometer “is a non-partisan, pan-African research institution conducting public attitude surveys on democracy, governance, the economy and society in 30+ countries repeated on a regular cycle. They are the world’s leading source of high-quality data on what Africans are thinking. Additionally, they are the world’s leading research project on issues that affect ordinary African men and women. Afrobarometer collects and publishes high-quality, reliable statistical data on Africa which is freely available to the public.”

The Afrobarometer conducts rounds of questionnaires in specific countries across the African continent. Since 2000, there have been 8 rounds with a total of 171 questionnaires. In the latest round, 34 surveys were asked in 34 different countries. Each country’s question was in one of four languages: Arabic, English, French, or Portuguese.

One example was the questionnaire for the country of Botswana , located in the southern part of the African continent. The survey was conducted in 2019, written in English, and included over 100 questions ranging from personal demographics, views of the economy, politics and recent elections, the media, taxes, corruption, and how the government was handling different matters. To explore the results of the survey, please visit Summary of results: Afrobarometer Round 8 survey in Botswana in 2019 .

Arab Barometer

Arab Barometer, according to its website, “is a nonpartisan research network that provides insight into the social, political, and economic attitudes and values of ordinary citizens across the Arab world. They have been conducting high quality and reliable public opinion surveys in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) since 2006. Arab Barometer is the longest-standing and the largest repository of publicly available data on the views of men and women in the MENA region. Their findings give a voice to the needs and concerns of Arab publics.”

From July 2020 to April 2021, the Arab Barometer conducted its sixth wave of surveying across the Middle East North African region, and specifically the countries of Algeria, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, and Iraq. This wave consisted of 3 parts from July-October 2020, October 2020, and March-April 2021. The Part 1 questionnaire featured 8 sections of questions: Core Demographics; Lebanon: Beirut Port Explosion; COVID-19; State of the Economy; Trust and Government Performance; Media, Religion, and Culture; International Relations; and Demographics. There are approximately 58 questions across these 8 sections. To explore the results of this wave for the country of Lebanon, read the Lebanon Country Report .

Asian Barometer

The Asian Barometer describes itself as “an applied research program that aims to gauge public opinion across Asia on issues such as political values, democracy, and governance. The ABS covers virtually all major political systems in the region, including regimes that have followed different trajectories and are at different stages of political transition, offering valuable comparative data for researchers and practitioners.”

There have been four completed waves of the core questionnaire of the Asian Barometer, with a fifth wave underway from 2018 to 2021. The fourth wave occurred from 2014 to 2016 and was in 14 countries: Taiwan, the Philippines, Thailand, Mongolia, Mainland China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, and Myanmar. The core questionnaire consisted of over 170 questions across 24 sections. Some of these sections range from Economic Evaluations, Trust in Institutions, and Social Capital to Citizenship, International Relations, and Socio-economic Background.

Unlike the prior barometers described, the survey results do not appear to be readily available for public consumption.

Eurasia Barometer

Eurasia Barometer writes that it is a “non-commercial non-governmental international social survey organization headquartered at the Institute for Comparative Survey Research "Eurasia Barometer" in Vienna, Austria. Its main aim is to monitor political, social and economic transformations in the countries of post-communist Europe and post-Soviet Eurasia in the opinion of their populations. The target geographical coverage of Eurasia Barometer includes countries of Eastern Europe (Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria), the Balkans, Russian Federation, Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia), Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan). Eurasia Barometer is a network of research organizations and individual researchers operating in more than 25 countries and including over 50 social and political scientists and social survey researchers.”

While it appears that the Eurasia Barometer has been inactive since 2018, this barometer included at least six different projects: New Democracies Barometer; Social and Political Trends in the CISl Interplay of European, National, and Regional Identities; Living Conditions, Lifestyles and Health; Models of Migration in New European Border Regions; and Health in Times of Transition.

For example, the New Democracies Barometer is described as “The cross-national and longitudinal survey "New Democracies Barometer (NDB)" has been conducted in 1991 (NDB I), 1992 (NDB II), 1994 (NDB III), 1996 (NDB IV) and 1998 (NDB V) by the Austrian Paul Lazarsfeld Society for Social Research and is covering the following 11 countries: Belarus, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia, Poland, Romania, Ukraine and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.”

The survey instrument appears to have consisted of 43 questions on topics ranging from employment status, how their system of government works, and views of the European Union. No survey results or summaries appear to be readily available.

Latino Barometer

Latinobarómetro, according to its webpage, is a “public opinion study that annually applies around 20,000 interviews in 18 Latin American countries representing more than 600 million inhabitants. Corporación Latinobarómetro is a non-profit NGO based in Santiago de Chile, solely responsible for the production and publication of the data. Corporación Latinobarómetro investigates the development of democracy, the economy and society as a whole, using public opinion indicators that measure attitudes, values and behaviors. The results are used by the region's socio-political actors, international, governmental and media actors.”

Since 1995, this barometer has conducted 22 surveys. The surveys, also called questionnaires, are available in both Spanish and English. The English version of the questionnaire consists of over 100 questions. For example, the first question of the 2020 survey asked “Generally speaking, would you say you are satisfied with your life?” Additionally, questions range from views on the government's role in society, integration across Latin American countries, views on immigration, and who has more power in a country.

The survey results are organized by country. For example, the 2020 questionnaire was fielded in 18 countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

For example, the 2020 survey conducted in the country of Ecuador had a total of 1,200 respondents, 587 who identified as a man and 613 who identified as a woman. 283 were individuals aged 15-25, 415 respondents were aged 26-40, 350 individuals were aged 41-60, and 155 respondents were aged 61 or more. To see aggregate responses to specific questions for specific countries in the region, visit Latinobarometro .

Comparative National Elections Project)

The Comparative National Elections Project (CNEP), hosted by The Ohio State University, describes itself as “a partnership among scholars who have conducted election surveys on five continents. Founded in the late 1980s, it now includes over 50 surveys from 1990 to 2021 in 30 different countries, with multiple election surveys in 16 countries. The geographical scope and theoretical concerns of the CNEP have substantially evolved over the past three decades, with essential items from earlier research foci retained in the common core questionnaire and merged dataset, creating time-series that for some countries stretch back over more than three decades.”

CNEP has over 50 publicly available surveys from countries around the world. For example, one of its first reports is from the 1990 German elections and one of its more recent reports is from the 2016 Taiwanese elections.

The CNEP has developed, and maintained, a common core of questionnaire items that are asked in country-specific surveys. The most recent common core includes what appears to be over 100 questions across 14 themes. Some of these themes include short-term campaign issues, communication channels in which individuals receive election information, socio-political values, and sub-national political identities and preferences for state structure.

One interesting aspect of CNEP’s publicly available surveys is that they are available by country and in the aggregate. The aggregate version includes all 53 available surveys’ common core items merged together in a single file that can be used by survey researchers and data analysts. The technical report of this merged dataset describes the county and year, timing of interviews, the survey organization who conducted the poll, the sponsor of the survey, sampling method, mode of survey (face-to-face, online, telephone, etc.), and population covered.

Unlike other surveys, such as the Afrobarometer and Latino Barometer, it does not appear that the survey results are prepared for general public consumption in the form of public-facing reports. Instead, the data is available in a specialized file format that requires knowledge and ability in using specialized data analysis software.

AmericasBarometer

The AmericasBarometer considers itself “the premier academic institution carrying out surveys of public opinion in the Americas, with over thirty years of experience. As a center for excellence in survey research, AmericasBarometer uses "gold standard" approaches and innovative methods to carry out targeted national surveys; conduct impact evaluation studies; and produce reports on individual attitudes, evaluations, and experiences. The AmericasBarometer survey is the only scientifically rigorous comparative survey that covers 34 nations including all of North, Central, and South America, as well as a significant number of countries in the Caribbean. Each year it publishes dozens of high quality academic studies and policy-relevant papers.”

The AmericasBarometer maintains a repository of country questionnaires and sample designs. Like other barometers, it has a core questionnaire that has been administered 9 times since 2004. The questionnaire is available in both Spanish and English. The most current survey, from 2021, includes two unique elements.

The first unique aspect of the AmericasBarometer is that it used a split-sample design. This means that half (50%) of respondents received a Core A set of questions, while the other half of respondents received a Core B set of questions. Additionally, there is a set of questions that all survey respondents were asked.

For example, a question that was asked of all respondents was “In your opinion, what is the most serious problem faced by the country?”. On the other hand, only individuals in the Core A split-sample were asked “To what extent do you respect the political institutions of [your country]?”. While individuals in Core B split-sample were only asked “Water is a limited, expensive to provide, and necessary resource. Which one of the following statements do you most agree with?”

Second, there are experimental modules within the survey. An experimental module means that the questions within this module are randomly assigned to survey respondents. For example, in the 2021 survey, there is an experimental module that includes 4 different treatments, or sets of questions. Each time the survey is administered, the person being interviewed has a 1 in 4 (25%) chance of being assigned a particular treatment. Experimental modules are increasingly common in surveys, as it allows the survey researcher to see how individuals respond to different “treatments” of questions.

Below is a visualization of split-sample design with common questions across 4 treatments. Split-sample design consists of two core sets of questions, labeled A and B. Given that respondents in sample A or B could be randomly assigned to 1 of 4 experimental modules, the circle of each sample is divided into four equal parts. Additionally, the inner green circle represents the common core questions that were asked regardless of split.

World Values Survey

Finally, the World Values Survey (WVS) writes that its “an international research program devoted to the scientific and academic study of social, political, economic, religious and cultural values of people in the world. The project’s goal is to assess which impact values stability or change over time has on the social, political and economic development of countries and societies.”

Unlike the prior barometers, the WVS is global in nature since it transcends regions and continents. The WVS has conducted seven waves of surveys since 1981. The latest, 7th wave, was conducted from 2017 to 2020 across 51 countries and territories. For this, and prior waves, there is a Master Survey Questionnaire that consists of a Core Questionnaire, Observations by the Interviewer, and Regional and Thematic Modules.

Within the core questionnaire, there are 290 questions asked across a wide range of topics, including happiness and well-being, science and technology, and ethical values and norms. For example, question #49 asks “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?” While question #158 asks a respondent to answer on a 10-point scale from completely disagree to completely agree with the following statement: “Science and technology are making our lives healthier, easier, and more comfortable.” And finally, question #195 asks whether the death penalty is never justifiable (point scale 1) to always justifiable (point scale 10).

In addition to these waves, the WVS has developed the Inglehart-Welzel Cultural Map. According to their website: “The map presents empirical evidence of massive cultural change and the persistence of distinctive cultural traditions. Main thesis holds that socioeconomic development is linked with a broad syndrome of distinctive value orientations. Analysis of WVS data made by political scientists Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel asserts that there are two major dimensions of cross-cultural variation in the world.”

The following is drawn from the WVS Database Findings and Insights page:

• Traditional values emphasize the importance of religion, parent-child ties, deference to authority and traditional family values. People who embrace these values also reject divorce, abortion, euthanasia and suicide. These societies have high levels of national pride and a nationalistic outlook.
• Secular-rational values have the opposite preferences to the traditional values. These societies place less emphasis on religion, traditional family values and authority. Divorce, abortion, euthanasia and suicide are seen as relatively acceptable. (Suicide is not necessarily more common.)
• Survival values place emphasis on economic and physical security. It is linked with a relatively ethnocentric outlook and low levels of trust and tolerance.
• Self-expression values give high priority to environmental protection, growing tolerance of foreigners, gays and lesbians and gender equality, and rising demands for participation in decision-making in economic and political life.

This cultural map brings together many different, and sometimes complementary, and other times competing, ideas and values onto a two-dimension scale. For a thorough introduction to this cultural map, please visit the Findings and Insights page of the WVS Database.

Contributor(s)

2022 version: Byran Martin, Ph.D. and Josh Franco, Ph.D.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

6 Chapter 8: Comparative Politics

Comparative politics centers its inquiry into politics around a method, not a particular object of study. This makes it unique since all the other subfields are orientated around a subject or focus of study. The comparative method is one of four main methodological approaches in the sciences (the others being statistical method, experimental method, and case study method). The method involves analyzing the relationship between variables that are different or similar to one another. Comparative politics commonly uses this comparative method on two or more countries and evaluating a specific variable across these countries, such as a political structure, institution, behavior, or policy. For example, you may be interested in what form of representative democracy best brings about consensus in government. You may compare majoritarian and proportional representation systems, such as the United States and Sweden, and evaluate the degree to which consensus develops in these governments. Conversely, you may take two proportional systems, such as Sweden and the United Kingdom, and evaluate whether there is any difference in consensus-building among similar forms of representative government. Although comparative politics often makes comparisons across countries, it can also conduct comparative analysis within one country, looking at different governments or political phenomena through time.

The comparative method is important to political science because the other main scientific methodologies are more difficult to employ. Experiments are very difficult to conduct in political science—there simply is not the level of recurrence and exactitude in politics as there is in the natural world. The statistical method is used more often in political science but requires mathematical manipulation of quantitative data over a large number of cases. The higher the number of cases (the letter N is used to denote number of cases), the stronger your inferences from the data. For a smaller number of cases, like countries, of which there is a limited number, the comparative method may be superior to statistical methodology. In short, the comparative method is useful to the study of politics in smaller cases that require comparative analysis between variables.

Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD)

This strategy is predicated on comparing very similar cases which differ in their dependent variable. In other words, two systems or processes are producing very different outcomes—why? The assumption here is that comparing similar cases that bring about different outcomes will make it easier for the researcher to control factors that are not the causal agent and isolate the independent variable that explains the presence or absence of the dependent variable. A benefit of this strategy is that it keeps confusing or irrelevant variables out of the mix by identifying two similar cases at the outset. Two similar cases implied a number of control variables—elements that make the cases similar—and very few elements that are dissimilar. Among those dissimilar elements is likely your independent variable that produced the presence/absence of your dependent variable. A downside to this approach is that when comparing across countries, it can be difficult to find similar cases due to a limited number of them. There can be a more strict or loose application of the MSSD model—similarities may be fairly exact or roughly the same, depending on the characteristic involved, and will influence your research project accordingly.

Example 8.1

Suppose you want to study how well forms of representative government develop consensus and agreement over policy matters. You may observe that nearly identical representative systems of government exist in County A and Country B, but are producing very different results.

• Country A has a proportional representation system and has a long and successful track record of producing consensus among lawmakers over a number of policy issues.
• Country B, however, is riddled with partisan disagreement and a lack of consensus over a similar kind and number of policy issues.

In this instance, you may also observe a number of similarities that act as control variables in your research—both countries have a bicameral legislature, a similar number of representatives per capita. This is a research project well suited to the MSSD approach, as it allows multiple control points (proportional representation, bicameral legislature, number of representatives, etc.) and allows for the researcher to focus on fine grain points of difference among the cases. You may observe in this example one intriguing difference in demographics—County A’s population is smaller and largely homogenous, whereas Country B’s population is larger and more diverse. It may be that in Country B this diverse population is well represented in the legislature but leads to more policy disputes and a relative lack of consensus when compared to Country A.

Most Different Systems Design (MDSD)

This strategy is predicated on comparing very different cases that are all have the same dependent variable. This strategy allows the research to identify a point of similarity between otherwise different cases and thus identify the independent variable that is causing the outcome. In other words, the cases we observe may have very different variables between them yet we can identify the same outcome happening—why do we have different systems producing the same outcome? The task is to then sift through the variables existing between the cases and isolate those that are in fact similar, since a similar variable between the cases may in fact be the causal agent that is producing the same outcome. An advantage to the MDSD approach is that it doesn’t have as many variables that need to be analyzed as the MSSD approach does—a researcher only needs to identify the same variable that exists across all different cases. The MSSD approach, on the other hand, tends to have a lot more variables that have to be considered although it may provide a more precise link between the independent and dependent variables.

Example 8.2

Let’s use an example that will help illustrate the MDSD approach. Suppose you observe two very different forms of representative government producing the same outcome: Country A has a majoritarian, winner-take-all representational system and Country B has a proportional representation system, yet in both countries there is a high degree of efficiency and consensus in the legislative process.

Why do two systems have the same outcome?

You may list a number of variables and compare them across the two cases, sifting through to locate similar variables. Unlike the MSSD approach, which seeks to locate different variables across similar cases, the MDSD approach is the opposite—the task is to locate similar variables across different cases. You may observe that despite the fact that these two countries have very different systems of representation, both have unicameral legislatures and a low number of representatives per capita. These factors may produce higher levels of efficiency and consensus in the legislative process, thus explaining the same dependent variable despite different cases.

The Nation-State

Much of comparative politics focuses on comparisons across countries, so it is necessary to examine the basic unit of comparative politics research—the nation-state.

A nation is a group of people bound together by a similar culture, language, and common descent, whereas a state is a political sovereign entity with geographic boundaries and a system of government. A nation-state, in an ideal sense, is when the boundaries of a national community are the same as the boundaries of a political entity. In this sense, we may say that a nation-state is a country in which the majority of its citizens share the same culture and reflect this shared identity in a sovereign political entity located somewhere in the world. Nation-states are therefore countries with a predominant ethnic group that articulates a culturally and politically shared identity. As should be apparent, this definition has some gray areas—culture is fluid and changes over time; migration patterns can change the make up of a nation-state and thus influence cultural and political changes; minority populations may substantially contribute to the characteristics that make up a shared national identity, and so on.

Nations may include a diaspora or population of people that live outside the nation-state. Some nations do not have states. The Kurdish nation is an example of a distinct ethnic group that lacks a state—the Kurds live in a region that straddles the borders of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran. Some other examples of nations without states include the numerous indigenous nations of the Americas, the Catalan and Basque nations in Spain, the Palestinian people in the Middle East, the Tibetan and Uyghur people in China, the Yoruba people of West Africa, and the Assamese people in India. Some previously stateless nations have since attained statehood—the former Yugoslav republics, East Timor, and South Sudan are somewhat recent examples. Not all stateless nations seek their own state, but many if not most have some kind of movement for greater autonomy if not independence. Some autonomous of breakaway regions are nations that have by force exercised autonomy from another country that claims that region. There are many such regions in the former Soviet Union: Abkhazia and South Ossetia (breakaway regions from Georgia), Transdniestria (breakaway region from Moldovia), Nagorno-Karabagh (breakaway region from Azerbaijan), and the recent self-declared autonomous provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk in the Ukraine. Most of these movements for autonomy are actively supported by Russia in an effort to control their sphere of influence. Abkhazians, South Ossetians, Trandniestrians, and residents of Luhansk and Donetsk can apply for Russian passports.

Lastly, some countries are not nation-states either because they do not possess a predominate ethnic majority or have structured a political system of more devolved power for semi-autonomous or autonomous regions. Belgium, for example, is a federal constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system with three highly autonomous regions: Flanders, Wallonia, and the Brussels capital region. The European Union is an interesting case of a supra-national political union of 28 states with a standardized system of laws and an internal single economic market. An outgrowth of economic agreements among Western European countries in the 1950s, the EU is today one of the largest single markets in the world and accounts for roughly a quarter of the global economic output. In addition to a parliament, the EU government, located in Brussels, Belgium, has a commission to execute laws, a courts system, and two councils, one for national ministers of the member states and the other for heads of state or government of the member states. The EU’s complicated political system allows for varying and overlapping levels of legal and political authority. Some member states have anti-EU movements in their countries that broadly share a concern over a loss of political and cultural autonomy in their country. The United Kingdom’s decision to leave the EU, known as “Brexit,” has been a complex and controversial process.

As this brief overview suggests, the concept of a nation-state is central to global politics. Crucial questions on what constitutes a nation-state underpin many of the most significant political conflicts in the world. Autonomous movements that seek greater sovereignty for a particular nation are found in every region of the world. At the heart of the relationship between nations and states is the idea of self-determination—that distinct cultural groups should be able to define their own political and economic destiny. Self-determination as a conception of justice suggests that freedom is not just individual but also communal—the freedom of defined groups to autonomy and self-direction.

Self-determination as a conception of justice suggests that freedom is not just individual but also communal—the freedom of defined groups to autonomy and self-direction.

The push and pull of power that brings nations together or tears them apart is everywhere in global politics. Moreover, states may appear stronger than they actually are, as the unexpected fall of the Soviet Union suggests. The legitimacy of the state and the cohesiveness of a nation go a long way toward understanding stability in the global world.

Comparing Constitutional Structures and Institutions

In Chapter Four we provided an overview of constitutions as a blueprints for political systems and in Chapter Three’s focus on political institutions we discussed legislative, executive, and judicial units and powers such as unicameral or bicameral legislatures, presidential systems, judicial review, and so on. The relationship between similar and different institutional forms make up the nuts and bolts of comparative political inquiry. In comparing constitutions across countries, each constitution speaks to the unique characteristics of a political community but there are also similarities. Constitutions typically outline the nature of political leadership, structure a form of political representation, provide for some form of executive authority, define a legal system for adjudicating law, and authorize and limit the reach of government power. On the other hand, there are several unique factors that determine a constitution an government. Geography, for example, often has a profound impact on the constitutional structure and form of government.

Large countries with scattered populations, for example, must be more sensitive to the legitimacy of the state in regions far removed from the center of government power. Some governments have moved their seat of power to more centralized and less populous cities in response to this concern—Abuja, Nigeria, Canberra, Australia, Dodoma, Tanzania, Yamoussoukro, Côte d’Ivoire, Brasilia, Brazil and Washington DC in the United States are examples of capital cities founded as a more central location in order to better balance power among competing regions.

Another factor is social stratification—differentiation in society based on wealth and status. What is typically regarded as lower, middle, and upper classes in most developed societies, social stratification can be complex, overlapping, and influenced by a variety of group characteristics such as race or ethnicity and gender. Social stratification can lead to political stratification—differing levels of access, representation, influence, and control of political power in government. This derived power can in turn reinforce social stratification in various ways. For example, the wealthy and privileged of a country may have derived political power from their wealth and in turn shape and influence government in such a way as to protect and increase their wealth, influence, and privilege. With the comparative method of political inquiry, political scientists can study the degrees to which social stratification effects political processes across countries. This kind of comparative inquiry can yield important insights such as whether wealth derived from group characteristics leads to greater political stratification than wealth derived across more diverse groups, or whether reforms directed at lessening political stratification have any effect on social stratification.

Lastly, global stratification suggests when looking at the global system, there is an unequal distribution of capital and resources such that countries with less powerful economies are dependent on countries with more powerful economies. Three broad classes define this global stratification: core countries, semi-peripheral countries, and peripheral countries. Core countries are highly industrialized and both control and benefit from the global economic market. Their relationship to peripheral countries is typically predicated on resource extraction—core countries may trade or may seek to outright control natural resources in the peripheral countries. Take as an example two open pit uranium mines located near Arlit in the African country of Niger. Niger, one of the poorest countries in the world, was a former colony of France. These mines were developed by French corporations, with substantial backing from the French government, in the early 1970s. French corporations continue to own, process, and transport uranium from the Arlit mines. The vast majority of the uranium needed for French nuclear power reactors and the French nuclear weapons program comes from Arlit. The mines have completely transformed Niger in a number of ways. 90% of the value of Niger’s exports come from uranium extraction and processing, leading to what some economists call a “resource curse”—a situation in which an economy is dominated by a single natural resource, hampering the diversification of the economy, industrialization, and the development of a highly skilled workforce.

Semi-periphery countries have intermediate levels of industrialization and development with a particular focus on manufacturing and service industries. Core countries rely on semi-peripheral countries to provide low cost services, making the economies of core and semi-peripheral countries well integrated with one another, but also creating an economic situation in which semi-peripheral countries become increasingly dependent on consumption in core countries and the global economy generally, sometimes at the expense of more economic self-sufficient and sustainable development. As an example, let’s consider Malaysia, a newly industrialized Asian country of over 40 million people. Malaysia has had a GDP growth rate of over 5% for 50 years. Previously a resource extraction economy, Malaysia went through rapid industrialization and is currently a major manufacturing economy, and is one of the world’s largest exporters of semi-conductors, IT and communication equipment, and electrical devices. It is also the home country of the Karex corporation, the world’s biggest producer of condoms.

Included among core countries are the United States and Canada, Western Europe and the Nordic countries, Australia, Japan, and South Korea. Semi-peripheral countries include China, India, Russia, Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and South Africa. Periphery countries include most of Africa, the Middle East, Central America, Eastern Europe, and several Asian countries. Reflect on the relationship between core, semi-peripheral, and peripheral countries. Do you think this relationship is predicated more on exploitation and control or mutually beneficial economic partnerships in a global environment? Choose three countries—one core, one semi-peripheral, and one peripheral—that have political and economic ties to one another. Evaluate and analyze relations between these countries. What are the prominent economic interactions? What best characterizes the diplomacy and political relations between these countries? Are the forms of government similar or different?

The Value of Languages and Comprehensive Knowledge

Comparative politics arguably requires more comprehensive knowledge of countries, political systems, cultures, and languages than the other sub-disciplines in political science. Language skill, in particular, is often essential for the comparativist to conduct good research. Having some facility with languages spoken in the countries or regions central to the research project gives researcher access to information and opens up avenues of communication and knowledge that is needed for in-depth understanding.  

In conducting field research, knowledge of local languages is critically important. Conducting interviews and doing observations in the field require familiarity with common languages spoken in the area. Grants are available from the US State Department and academic institutions for graduate students (and in some cases promising undergraduates) for language programs. The best environment for learning a foreign language is immersive—ideally, students should spend time in areas they have research interests in to gain familiarity with the language(s) and cultural practices. For example, if one wanted to conduct a comparative research project on political development in Kosovo and Abkhazia—two breakaway autonomous republics of similar size and population that are key sites of the geopolitical struggle between the West and Russia—it would be necessary to have some familiarity with Albanian (the dominant language of Kosovo) and Abkhaz, but it may also be helpful to have some exposure to Serbian, Russian, and Georgian as well.

Comparativists should ideally have broad but deep knowledge of the world—understanding regional issues, environmental resources, demographics, and relations between countries provides a pool of general knowledge that can help comparativists avoid obstacles while conducting their research. For example, if one were conducting a study on the relationship between women’s access to contraceptives and the percent of women in the workforce with a data set of some 150 countries, it is useful to know that in the non-Magreb countries of Africa women make up a disproportionately large percentage of agricultural labor. Despite low access to contraceptives, sub-Saharan African countries have relatively high percentages of women in the work force due to the cross-cultural norm of women farmers.

Field Research in Comparative Politics

A crucial component of doing comparative politics is field research—the collection of data or information in the relevant areas of your research focus. Where political theory is akin to the discipline of philosophy, comparative politics is akin to anthropology in this field research component. Comparativists are encouraged to “leave the office” and bring their research out into the relevant areas in the world. Being on the ground affords the researcher a firsthand perspective and access to the sources that underpin good comparative analysis. Conducting surveys with local respondents, doing interviews with key actors in and out of government, and making participant observations are some common methods of gathering evidence for the field researcher. To continue with the above example of Kosovo and Abkhazia, suppose a researcher was interested in comparing constitutional development and reform in the two republics. Interviews with key actors in developing those respective constitutions would provide a firsthand account of the process, while surveys conducted with local responses could measure the degree of support for key reforms. A researcher could also conduct participant observations of the legislative process, media events, or council meetings.

Being in the field always comes with surprises that may alter the research project in numerous ways. Poor infrastructure may hamper travel. Corruption may create obstacles in survey work or interviews. Locals may be unwilling to work with a foreign researcher whose intentions are in doubt. It is always important to balance your ideal research project with the practical realities you find on the ground. Deciding whether to take a short or long trip abroad is also an important consideration—shorter trips may bring more focus and efficiency to your work and also afford more opportunity to identify points of comparison and contrast, whereas longer trips can be more open-ended and immersive, giving the researcher the opportunity to develop contacts and and have a more in-depth cultural experience. Lastly, case selection and sampling are important considerations—macro-level case selection involves identifying a country to conduct field work; meso-level selection involves locating relevant regions or towns; micro-level selection involves identifying individuals to interview or specific documents for content analysis.

Comparative politics is more about a method of political inquiry than a subject matter in politics. The comparative method seeks insight through the evaluation and analysis of two or more cases. There are two main strategies in the comparative method: most similar systems design, in which the cases are similar but the outcome (or dependent variable) is different, and most different systems design, in which the cases are different but the outcome is the same. Both strategies can yield valuable comparative insights. A key unit of comparison is the nation-state, which gives a researcher relatively cohesive cultural and political entities as the basis of comparison. A nation-state is the overlap of a definable cultural identity (a nation) with a political system that reflects and affirms characteristics of that identity (a state).

In comparing constitutions and political institutions across countries, it is important to analyze the factors that shape unique constitutional and institutional designs. Geography and basic demographics play a role, but also social stratification, or difference among individuals in terms of wealth or prestige. Social stratification is often reflected, and subsequently reinforced, in political stratification (differentiation in political power, access, and representation). Lastly, global stratification suggests an imbalance of power in the global world, in which core countries are able to control or influence economic and political processes in semi-periphery and periphery countries.

In the next chapter, we will consider a very different set of sub-disciplines—American politics and public policy and administration.

Media Attributions

• IV DV © Jay Steinmetz is licensed under a CC BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) license
• 1024px-Kurdistan_wkp_reg_en © Ferhates is licensed under a CC BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) license
• Geopolitics_South_Russia © Spiridon Ion Cepleanu is licensed under a CC BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) license
• Nigeria-karte-politisch_english is licensed under a CC BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) license
• World_trade_map © Lou Coban is licensed under a Public Domain license
• Sawe, Benjamin Elisha. "What is the Most Spoken Language in the World?" WorldAtlas, Jun. 7, 2019, worldatlas.com/articles/most-popular-languages-in-the-world.html (accessed on August 7, 2019).. ↵

Politics, Power, and Purpose: An Orientation to Political Science Copyright © 2019 by Jay Steinmetz is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

3 Case Studies in Comparative Politics

From the book teaching political science to undergraduates.

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Chapters in this book (20)

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A practical guide to the comparative case study method in political psychology

1999, Political Psychology

Related Papers

Philosophy of Science

Sharon Crasnow

Political science research, particularly in international relations and comparative politics,has increasingly become dominated by statistical and formal approaches. The promise of these approaches shifted the methodological emphasis away from case study research. In response, supporters of case study research argue that case studies provide evidence for causal claims that is not available through statistical and formal research methods, and many have advocated multimethod research. I propose a way of understanding the integration of multiple methodologies in which the causes sought in case studies are treated as singular causation and contingent on a theoretical framework.

Christopher Leo

American Political Science Association [APSA …

Political Psychology

Helen Haste

Daniel Bar-Tal

Gilda Sensales

Cristian Tileaga

This book provides an introduction to political psychology through a focus on European politics and topics. It describes a style of doing political psychology in Europe that has developed out of dialogue with as well as critique of North American approaches. By emphasising the theoretical and methodological diversity of political psychology, the book is intended to contribute to a greater understanding of the strength and utility of the field. • Opens up and extends the study of political psychology to a variety of socio-political contexts and manifestations of political behaviour • Clearly outlines the usefulness and promises of distinctive critical approaches in social and political psychology • Explicitly considers the role of language, communication, identity and social representations in the construction of political meanings. Political Psychology will appeal to upper-level students and scholars who seek to extend their knowledge of the complex relationship between psychology, politics and society.

Christian Staerklé

RELATED PAPERS

Hasan Indra

Marine Biology

John Humphreys

Nordisk tidsskrift for helseforskning

Signe Julnes

Biomedicines

Giuseppe Fornarini

The European Physical Journal Applied Physics

vincent fleury

Aníbal Carlos Zottele Allende

JAIME ENRIQUE RAMÍREZ SÁNCHEZ

Trabajo y Sociedad

Agustin Angel Mario

2012 16th International Symposium on Wearable Computers

hideaki nii

Sheher bano

Jurnal Telekomunikasi dan Komputer

Cahyo Prianto

The Japanese Journal of Physiology

Janez Rozman

Toxicology Letters

Masato Koreeda

Academia Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences

Md. Sayedur Rahman

Argentine Journal of Cardiology

Ricardo Costantini

Dong-Qing Wei

RAHMANIAR RAHMANIAR

phuthanh.tiengiang.edu.vn

European Journal of Turkish Studies

Emmanuel Szurek

Annals of Surgery

Ingemar Ihse

arXiv (Cornell University)

Boudour AMMAR

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Social Enterprise Transformation and Its Effects on Socio-economic Development: A Comparative Case Study of Developed and Developing Countries

• Published: 10 May 2024

Cite this article

• Hero Rana Barua Mito 1 &
• Mousumi Akter 1  

50 Accesses

Explore all metrics

In the contemporary era, the phenomenon of social enterprises (SE) exerting influence on global socio-economic advancement has garnered substantial attention, bearing profound implications for the contemporary economic landscape. Both emerging and established nations frequently bear witness to its consequential effects on their economies, as the transformation of social enterprises engenders far-reaching impacts on socio-economic growth. This study aims to systematically compare the discernible effects of global social enterprise transformation on 20 developed and developing countries socio-economic development. The consequent discussion examines into the intricate dynamics of social enterprises undergoing transformation, functioning as collaborative entities encompassing the private, public, and civil sectors. These entities continuously refine their methodologies in alignment with their objectives, as evidenced by an exhaustive review of diverse case studies spanning the global landscape of social enterprises. Initiatives such as revitalization, acquisitions, and heightened operational efficacy collectively serve as concerted endeavors to attain sustainable societal progress across the realms of economics, culture, and politics. The findings of this research posit that the transformation of social enterprises significantly contributes to the global socio-economic development paradigm. Notably, our results indicate that the impact and outcomes of social enterprise transformation exhibit a pronounced magnitude in developed and developing countries in effective way to take economic development to another level. This comparative case study, focusing on both developed and developing countries, aims to provide nuanced insights into the intricate interplay between social enterprise transformation and socio-economic development on a global scale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Social enterprise, policy entrepreneurs, and the third sector: the case of south korea, the polish social enterprise sector vis-à-vis the welfare regime: following on the solidarity movement, fundamentals for an international typology of social enterprise models, data availability.

The data used and materials are available on request.

Abbasi, B. N., Umer, M., Sohail, A., Tang, J., Ullah, I., & Abbasi, H. (2019). Service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in banking sector of Pakistan. International Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research, 1 (1), 1–8.

Article   Google Scholar  

Afrin, K. H., & Ahmed, A. (2023). Social entrepreneurship as a tool of development: conceptual perspective. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8 (6), 11.

Almeida, D. F. (2010). Social ventures and social entrepreneurs: factors for success . (Doctoral dissertation, ISCTE-Instituto Universitario de Lisboa (Portugal).

Google Scholar  

Alter, S. K. (2002). Case studies in social enterprise: Counterpart international’s experience . Counterpart International.

Alvord, S. H., Brown, L. D., & Letts, C. W. (2004). Social entrepreneurship and social transformation: An exploratory study. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40 (3), 260–293.

Andreasen, A. R. (2003). Strategic marketing for nonprofit organizations . Prentice Hall.

Austin, J. E. (2000). Strategic collaboration between nonprofits and business. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29 (1), 69–97.

Austrom, D. R., & Paterson, M. M. (1989, August). Project Hometown America: A case study of an innovative public-private partnership. Paper presented at the Academy of Management meeting, Washington, DC.

Bansal, S., Garg, I., & Vasa, L. (2023). Can social enterprises aid sustainable development? Evidence from multi-stage investigations. PLoS One, 18 (2), e0281273.

Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2004). Social alliances: Company/ nonprofit collaboration. California Management Review, 47 (1), 58–90.

Bickman, L. (1987). The functions of program theory. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 1987 (33), 5–18.

Borzaga, C., & Defourny, J. (Eds.). (2001). The emergence of social enterprise (Vol. 4). Routledge.

Boschee, J. (2001). Eight basic principles for nonprofit entrepreneurs. Nonprofit World, 19 (4), 15–18.

Bosma, N., Schøtt, T., Terjesen, S. A., & Kew, P. (2015). Special topic report social entrepreneurship . American University. https://doi.org/10.17606/1wxf-cx19

Book   Google Scholar  

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brest and Harvey. (2008). Money well spent: A strategic plan for smart philanthropy . Bloomberg Press.

Brooks, H., Liebman, L., & Schelling, C. (Eds.). (1984). Public–private partnerships: New opportunities for meeting social needs . Ballinger.

Campos, V., Sanchis, J. R., & Ejarque, A. (2020). Social entrepreneurship and Economy for the Common Good: Study of their relationship through a bibliometric analysis. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 21 (3), 156–167.

Carvalho, E., & Bicho, M. (2023). Social entrepreneur perceived success by integrating cognitive mapping and MCDA. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 20 (4), 406–432.

Chang, E., Lee, J. W., & Chin, H. (2022). Employees striving for innovation in social enterprises: The roles of social mission and commitment-based human resource management. Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, 31 (3), 702–717.

Crutchfield, L. R., & Grant, H. M. L. (2008). Forces for good: The six practices of high-impact nonprofits . Wiley.

Defourny, J. (2001). Introduction: From third sector to social enterprise. In C. Borzaga & J. Defourny (Eds.), The emergence of social enterprise (pp. 13–40). London: Routledge.

Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An institutional-stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43 (1), 47–73.

Dorado, S. (2006). Social entrepreneurial ventures: different values so different process of creation, no? Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 11 (04), 319–343.

Drayton, W. (2002). The citizen sector: Becoming as entrepreneurial and competitive as business. California Management Review, 44 (3), 120–132.

Erden, D., & Bodur, M. (2010). Responsibility and performance: Social action of firms in a transitional society. In G. Aras & D. Crowther (Eds.), A handbook of corporate governance and social responsibility (pp. 341–364). Gower Publications.

Eversole, R., Barraket, J., & Luke, B. (2014). Social enterprises in rural community development. Community Development Journal, 49 (2), 245–261.

Fowler, A. (2000). NGDOs as a moment in history: beyond aid to social entrepreneurship or civic innovation? Third World Quarterly, 21 (4), 637–654.

Frumkin, P. (2002). Social Entrepreneurship On Being Nonprofits . Harvard University Press.

Gertner, R. H. (2023). The organization of social enterprises. Annual Review of Economics, 15 , 41–62.

Hartigan, P. (2004). The challenge for social entrepreneurship . Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship Global Summit 2004.

Henton, D. C., Melville, J., & Walesh, K. (1997). Grassroots leaders for a new economy.

Holt, D. H. (1992). Entrepreneurship: New venture creation. (No Title).

Hossain, D. M. (2007). Social entrepreneurs in Bangladesh.

Hossain, D. M., & Hossain, M. (2012). Social Entrepreneurs in Bangladesh, International Journal of Research in Commerce. IT & Management, 2 (9), 7–12.

Hughes, D. W. (2003). Policy uses of economic multiplier and impact analysis. Choices, 25–29 Second Quarter.

Jessop, B., Moulaert, F., Hulgård, L., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). Social innovation research: A new stage in innovation analysis. The International Handbook On Social Innovation: Collective Action, Social Learning and Transdisciplinary Research, 110–130.

Johannisson, B., & Nilsson, A. (1989). Community entrepreneurs: Networking for local development. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 1 (1), 3–19.

Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international relations . Cornell University Press.

Kim, Y., & Jun, H. (2022). Exploring technology innovation factors, government support and performance of development-related social enterprises: evidence from South Korea. Sustainability, 14 (22), 15406.

Liñares-Zegarra, J. M., & Wilson, J. O. (2023). Navigating uncertainty: The resilience of third-sector organizations and socially oriented small-and medium-sized enterprises during the COVID-19 pandemic. Financial Accountability & Management .

Littlewood, D., & Holt, D. (2018). Social entrepreneurship in South Africa: Exploring the influence of environment. Business & Society, 57 (3), 525–561.

Mahboob, D. H., & Moinul, H. (2012). Social Entrepreneurs in Bangladesh.  International Journal of Research in Commerce, IT & Management, 2 (9).

Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2004). Social entrepreneurship: What are we talking about? A framework for future research (No. D/546) . IESE Business School.

Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41 , 36–44.

Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2009). Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh. Journal of Business Venturing, 24 (5), 419–435.

Marti, I., & Mair, J. (2009). Bringing change into the lives of the poor: Entrepreneurship outside traditional boundaries (pp. 92–119). Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations.

Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: the case for definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 1 , 29–39.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

Millar, C. J. M., Choi, C. J., & Chen, S. (2004). Global strategic partnerships between MNE’s and NGO’s: Drivers of change and ethical issues. Business and Society Review, 109 (4), 395–414.

Milne, G. R., Iyer, E. S., & Gooding-Williams, S. (1996). Environmental organization alliance relationships within and across nonprofit, business, and government sectors. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 15 (2), 203–215.

Milošević, M. R., Nikolić, M. M., Milošević, D. M., & Dimić, V. (2022). Managing resources based on influential indicators for sustainable economic development: a case study in Serbia. Sustainability, 14 (8), 4795.

Oberoi, R., & Halsall, J. P. (2019). Social enterprise as catalyst for Change: Case study of India and UK. In The Components of Sustainable Development: Engagement and Partnership (pp. 231–247). Springer Singapore.

Paton, R. (2003). Managing and measuring social enterprises . Sage Publications.

Peredo, A. M., & Chrisman, J. J. (2006). Toward a theory of community-based enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 31 (2), 309–328.

Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6 (4), 34–43.

Pomerantz, M. (2003). The business of social entrepreneurship in a "down economy". In Business-Emmaus Pennsylvania, 25 (2), 25–28.

Powell, M., & Berry, F. S. (2021). Introducing research insights into the third sector, social enterprise and public service delivery. Public Management Review, 23 (5), 633–640.

Prakash, A. (2002). Beyond Seattle: Globalization, the nonmarket environment and corporate strategy. Review of International Political Economy, 9 (3), 513–537.

Rahdari, A., Sepasi, S., & Moradi, M. (2016). Achieving sustainability through Schumpeterian social entrepreneurship: The role of social enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137 , 347–360.

Raimi, L., Dodo, F., & Sule, R. (2022). Comparative discourse of social enterprises in the developed and developing countries using theory of change framework: a qualitative analysis. In Social Entrepreneurs (Vol. 18, pp. 29–54). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Roy, A., Basu, A., & Dong, X. (2021). Achieving socioeconomic development fuelled by globalization: An analysis of 146 countries. Sustainability, 13 (9), 4913.

Seanor, P., & Meaton, J. (2007). Making sense of social enterprise. Social Enterprise Journal, 3 (1), 90–100.

Sharir, M., & Lerner, M. (2006). Gauging the success of social ventures initiated by individual social entrepreneurs. Journal of World Business, 41 (1), 6–20.

Sullivan Mort, G., Weerawardena, J., & Carnegie, K. (2003). Social entrepreneurship: Towards conceptualization. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8 (1), 76–88.

Sztompka, P. (1994). The sociology of social change . Wiley-Blackwell.

Touboul, S., & Roulet, T. J. (2011). How to Turn entrepreneurs into social entrepreneurs? A challenge for developing countries. Journal of Social Business , (2).

Vega, G., & Kidwell, R. E. (2007). Toward a typology of new venture creators: similarities and contrasts between business and social entrepreneurs. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 10 (2), 15–28.

Weerawardena, J., & Mort, G. S. (2006). Investigating social entrepreneurship: A multidimensional model. Journal of World Business, 41 (1), 21–35.

Wholey, J. S. (1983). Evaluation and effective public management . Little, Brown.

World Economic Forum (2004). The Davos report: Highlights, outcomes and next steps from the 2004 World Economic Forum. (Retrieved from). http://www.weforum.org/summitreports (December 21, 2009).

Wu, Y. C., Wu, Y. J., & Wu, S. M. (2018). Development and challenges of social enterprises in Taiwan—From the perspective of community development. Sustainability, 10 (6), 1797.

Young, D. (2008). In J. J. Cordes & E. C. Steuerle (Eds.), Alternative Perspectives on Social Enterprise . Nonprofits & Business, The Urban Institute Press.

Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24 (5), 519–532.

Links of important data adaptations

1) https://www.germanwatch.org/en/about

2) https://ashoka-usa.org/fellows

3) https://www.miyagi.coop/about/profile/pdf/profile_english_2019.pdf

4) https://www.cafedirect.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/FY2022-Cafedirect-plc-Statutory-Accounts-signed.pdf

5) https://www.sustainablejungle.com/

6) https://www.vodafone.com/about-vodafone/what-we-do/consumer-7products-and-services/m-pesa

7) https://kynaenglish.com/about

8) https://www.brac.net/annual-reports-and-publications

9) https://www.enicbcmed.eu/sites/default/files/2023-11/PP_Social%20Enterprises-n_YF.pdf

10) https://www.garbagecan.pk/

11) https://tdri.or.th/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Volume-36-Number-3-September-2021.pdf

12) https://ladafavelinha.com.br/

13) https://www.dlalanje.org/about

14) https://www.kuskop.gov.my/admin/files/med/image/portal/PDF/SEMy2030/SEMy2030_Booklet_ENG.pdf

15) https://www.riceandcarry.eu/en/

16) https://virtualahan.com/

17) https://www.justgiving.com/project/5352458

18) https://www.tebitambulance.com/

19) https://techera-gh.org/

20) https://ketemu.org/about/

21) https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/more_in_common_global_state_of_social_enterprise.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Business, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China

Li Qi, Hero Rana Barua Mito & Mousumi Akter

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Li Qi conceived and designed, performed the experiments, and wrote the paper. Hero Rana Barua Mito analyzed and interpreted the data. Mousumi Akter contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools, or data.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hero Rana Barua Mito .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval.

Not applicable.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Qi, L., Mito, H.R.B. & Akter, M. Social Enterprise Transformation and Its Effects on Socio-economic Development: A Comparative Case Study of Developed and Developing Countries. J Knowl Econ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02042-4

Download citation

Received : 19 January 2024

Accepted : 23 April 2024

Published : 10 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02042-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Socio-economic development
• Social-enterprise
• Transformation
• Developing countries
• Developed countries
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research