Comparative Politics

By

Acknowledgement

I would take this opportunity to thank my research supervisor, family and friends for their support and guidance without which this research would not have been possible.

DECLARATION

I, [type your full first names and surname here], declare that the contents of this dissertation/thesis represent my own unaided work, and that the dissertation/thesis has not previously been submitted for academic examination towards any qualification. Furthermore, it represents my own opinions and not necessarily those of the University.

Signed __________________ Date _________________

Abstract

In this study we try to explore the concept of “comparative politics” in a holistic context. the main focus of the research is on “Comparative Politics” and its relation with “political regimes and transitions”. the research also analyzes many aspects of “Comparative Politics” and tries to gauge its effect on “political instability, political conflict”. finally the research describes various factors which are responsible for “Comparative Politics” and tries to describe the overall effect of “comparative politics” on “populations and case selection”.

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION6

THEORY DEVELOPMENT8

Novel Hypothesis Formulation9

Concepts and Measurement12

THEORY AND METHODS16

STATES, STATE FORMATION, AND POLITICAL CONSENT23

POLITICAL REGIMES AND TRANSITIONS25

POLITICAL INSTABILITY, POLITICAL CONFLICT29

Populations and Case Selection31

THEORY TESTING35

Within-Case Analysis36

Cross-Case Analysis39

Combining Cross-Case and Within-Case Analysis43

CONCLUSION46

REFERENCES49

Introduction

Beginning in the 1990s, the field of comparative politics saw an unprecedented wave of publications concerning qualitative and small-N methods (Munck 1998 ,109). These publications built on earlier work on comparative methodology dating to the 1970s (e.g., Lipjhart 1971, 1975; Przeworksi and Tuene 1970; Smelser 1973, 1976, 990). However, whereas the earlier work often viewed qualitative methodology as advancing a set of "last-resort" techniques that should be employed only when other methods (e.g., statistical methods) are not appropriate, the current work emphasizes the distinctive advantages of qualitative research. This new emphasis corresponds to research practices in the field. Students of comparative politics frequently turn to qualitative methods instead of or in combination with alternative techniques because they believe that qualitative methods are essential for addressing many substantive questions of interest.

Today, scholars using qualitative methods explore all of the major substantive topics in comparative politics. For evidence, one can point to influential work across the any of the key areas of the field: democracy and authoritarianism (e.g., Collier 1999 55;Linz and Stepan 1996 318 ; Rueschemeyer, Stephens, and Stephens 1992, 54); economic development (e.g., Amsden 2003; Evans 1995, 69; Kohli 2004 204, 41); state formation (e.g., Downing 1992; Ertman 1997; Tilly 1990; Waldner 1999); nationalism and ethnicity (e.g., Lustick 1993 18; Marx 1998; Varshney 2002 ,50); violence and state collapse (e.g., Reno 1998;Boone 2003), social revolutionary change (e.g., Colburn 1994; Goodwin 2001 158; Parsa 2000); social movements (e.g., Goldstone 2003; McAdam, Tarrow, and Tilly 2001 ,77; Tarrow 1994); electoral and party systems (e.g., Collier and Collier 1991; Kitschelt 1994); and social policy (e.g., Esping-Anderson 1990; Hicks 1999; Skocpol 1992 ,60).

Although this listing only scratches the surface of huge literatures, it does point to the leading place of qualitative methods in the field.

Studies that are associated with alternative methodologies also suggest the centrality of qualitative methodology. For example, rational choice works often draw on qualitative ...