IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/intare/v3y2000i2p141-177.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Review on the Methodological Arguments in the Study of Comparative Politics

Author

Listed:
  • Mun Hee Kang

Abstract

This paper seeks to explain three distinctive trends of methodological arguments in the contemporary study of comparative politics, which are positivists, realists, and statists. On these three approaches, there is no consensus among scholars about which one is the most appropriate to the comparative study of different nation-states. The purpose of this paper is to identify the strength and weakness in the conflicting arguments found in three approaches. This involves an overall analysis of the various ontological perspectives, different problem perceptions, and future alternatives. In this comparative review, this paper also attempts to present inherent problems in each trend.

Suggested Citation

  • Mun Hee Kang, 2000. "A Review on the Methodological Arguments in the Study of Comparative Politics," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 3(2), pages 141-177, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:141-177
    DOI: 10.1177/223386590000300208
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/223386590000300208
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/223386590000300208?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Easton, David, 1969. "The New Revolution in Political Science," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(4), pages 1051-1061, December.
    2. Lijphart, Arend, 1971. "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 682-693, September.
    3. Almond, Gabriel A., 1988. "The Return to the State," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 82(3), pages 853-874, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rachel M. Gisselquist, 2018. "Legal empowerment and group-based inequality," WIDER Working Paper Series 039, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Petteri Repo & Kaisa Matschoss, 2019. "Social Innovation for Sustainability Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Jennifer Robinson, 2011. "Cities in a World of Cities: The Comparative Gesture," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 1-23, January.
    4. Gisselquist, Rachel M., 2020. "How the cases you choose affect the answers you get, revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    5. Dishil Shrimankar, 2023. "Comparative Assessments of Indian Democracy," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 11(1), pages 134-139, June.
    6. Andrew Murray Faure, 1994. "Some Methodological Problems in Comparative Politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 6(3), pages 307-322, July.
    7. Kristin Bergtora Sandvik & Ingunn Bjørhaug & Astrid Espegren & Adèle Garnier, 2023. "Protecting skilled Afghan women: Brain save and the politics of vulnerability," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(1), pages 5-15, February.
    8. Virginie Boutueil & Thomas Quillerier & Anna Voskoboynikova, 2019. "Benefits and Pitfalls of Deregulating Taxi Markets: Can Contrasted Case Studies Help Inform the Debate?," Post-Print hal-02422160, HAL.
    9. Cacace, Mirella & Ettelt, Stefanie & Mays, Nicholas & Nolte, Ellen, 2013. "Assessing quality in cross-country comparisons of health systems and policies: Towards a set of generic quality criteria," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 156-162.
    10. Huiqi Yan & Jeroen van der Heijden & Benjamin van Rooij, 2017. "Symmetric and asymmetric motivations for compliance and violation: A crisp set qualitative comparative analysis of Chinese farmers," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 64-80, March.
    11. Mathieu Rousselin, 2012. "The EU as a Multilateral Rule Exporter - The Global Transfer of European Rules via International Organizations," KFG Working Papers p0048, Free University Berlin.
    12. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Van de Graaf, Thijs, 2018. "Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 317-324.
    13. Justin Reedy & Raymond Orr & Paul Spicer & Jessica W. Blanchard & Vanessa Y. Hiratsuka & Terry S. Ketchum & Bobby Saunkeah & Kyle Wark & R. Brian Woodbury, 2020. "Deliberative democracy and historical perspectives on American Indian/Alaska native political decision-making practices," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Mathias Lund Larsen, 2023. "Bottom-up market-facilitation and top-down market-steering: comparing and conceptualizing green finance approaches in the EU and China," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 61-80, March.
    15. Roth, Felix, 2024. "Is Generalized Trust Stable over Time?," Hamburg Discussion Papers in International Economics 15, University of Hamburg, Department of Economics, revised 2024.
    16. Sattler, Claudia & Trampnau, Susanne & Schomers, Sarah & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 31-45.
    17. Zeigermann, Ulrike & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy – The case of OECD ‘Focal Points’ for Policy Coherence for Development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    18. Louise Tillin, 2013. "National and Subnational Comparative Politics: Why, What and How," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 1(2), pages 235-240, December.
    19. Marianna Belloc & Ugo Pagano, 2008. "Politics-Business Interaction Paths," Working Papers in Public Economics 109, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Economics and Law.
    20. Suraj Jacob, 2015. "Towards a Comparative Subnational Perspective on India," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 3(2), pages 229-246, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:141-177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.hufs.ac.kr/user/hufsenglish/re_1.jsp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.