lecture 1
comparative politics:
- systematic study of domestic politics
- we can only understand our political context if we can put it in perspective
- discussion of topics: democracies, legislatures,...
= empirical questions and interactions within political systems
3 traditions:
1. country focus: description of systems of countries
2. methodological focus: establish rules and standards for comparative analysis
3. analytical focus: combo of substance and method: explain similarities and differences
between and within countries
→ aim=explain, comparison=method
- Describe similarities and differences
→ Classifications, typologies
- Explain similarities and differences
→ Formulate/test hypotheses
- Make predictions
→Formulate expectations (of interventions/with respect to change)
evolution of comparative politics
initial: limited, focus on: western europe, north america, formal state institutions (=3state
powers), legal documents and texts
around ww2: new cases and behavioural revolution, focus on → breakdown of democracies,
populism in Latin America, socialism in Eastern Europe, decolonization, empirical behaviour,...
Consequences:
- More recognition of different political systems (not just one model)
- Greater focus on non-state actors (parties, interest groups, civil society, voters)
- Shift to empirical methods → data, statistics, large-N studies
- Move from case studies → variable-based analysis
- Higher level of theoretical abstraction
- Development of systemic functionalism (e.g. David Easton, Karl Deutsch)
- Emergence of the concept “political system”
Reaction to abstraction
● From universal → middle-range theories
● Focus on institutions (new institutionalism)
● Shift to small-N & case studies (QCA)
● Rise of Rational Choice Theory (rational, self-interested actors)
,And now
● Broader view of institutions
● Focus on output & throughput
● More interdependence between systems
● Mix of methods (quant + qual)
● Combine cases + variables
● Attention to differences (divergence)
What to compare
● Spatial → across countries/regions
● Functional → policies, actors, ideologies
● Longitudinal → over time
Role of theory in comparative politics
● Move beyond description → explanation
● Theories help analyze data
● Link micro (individual) ↔ macro (system)
● Two main types:
○ Positivist (facts = observable)
○ Constructivist (facts = socially constructed)
Empirical/comparative political theory
● Explains political phenomena
● Generates research questions
● Uses data + methods to test theory
● Triangulation = multiple methods/data/theories
Perspectives: Institutions
● Institutions shape behaviour
● Types: presidential vs parliamentary, unitary vs federal
● Path dependence (past choices matter)
● Weak at explaining change
Perspectives: Interests
● Politics = who gets what
● Focus on self-interest (Rational Choice Theory)
● Importance of groups (corporatism, networks, identity groups)
Perspectives: Ideas
● Culture, ideologies, policy ideas matter
● Political culture = hard to measure
● Examples:
, ○ Gabriel Almond & Sidney Verba
○ Robert Putnam (social capital)
● Ideas shape policy choices
Lecture 2
Democracy – basics
● Democracy = ideal + historical + real system
● Today = main source of legitimacy
● Often = liberal/representative democracy
Definitions of democracy
● Procedural (Schumpeter) → elections
● Substantive (Dahl) → participation + contestation (polyarchy)
Core features
● Free & fair elections
● Universal participation
● Civil liberties
● Accountable government
Measuring democracy
● Dichotomy → democracy vs dictatorship
● Continuous scale (e.g. Freedom House, V-Dem)
● Hybrid regimes / illiberal democracies
Types of democracy
● Parliamentary vs Presidential
● Consensus vs Majoritarian
Parliamentary vs Presidential
● Parliamentary → flexible, weaker head of state
● Presidential → strong president, strict separation of powers
● Semi-presidential → mix
Consensus vs Majoritarian
● Majoritarian → decisive but polarizing
● Consensus → inclusive but slower (veto players)
● Consensus often performs equal/better
, Polarization (article)
● Institutions affect polarization levels
● Consensus systems → less polarization
● PR, coalitions, federalism reduce polarization
Classifying systems
● Gabriel Almond & Sidney Verba → political culture
● Arend Lijphart → consensus vs majoritarian
● Gerring → centripetal vs decentralist
Democratization & backsliding
● Transition vs preservation
● Backsliding = gradual erosion
● Risk: executive power concentration
Factors stimulating democracy I
● Economic development (not always sufficient)
● Inequality → hinders democracy
● Institutions matter (e.g. presidential instability)
Factors stimulating democracy II
● Actors → leaders, social movements
● Non-violent resistance works better
● International influence (diffusion, aid)
Nature of democracy
● Not one thing → set of institutions
● Gradual differences (not yes/no)
● Many possible combinations
Performance of democracy
● Democracy ≠ automatically well-being
● Governance matters more than institutions alone
Governance
● Key = state capacity, rule of law, low corruption
● Strong impact on:
○ well-being
○ trust
○ legitimacy
comparative politics:
- systematic study of domestic politics
- we can only understand our political context if we can put it in perspective
- discussion of topics: democracies, legislatures,...
= empirical questions and interactions within political systems
3 traditions:
1. country focus: description of systems of countries
2. methodological focus: establish rules and standards for comparative analysis
3. analytical focus: combo of substance and method: explain similarities and differences
between and within countries
→ aim=explain, comparison=method
- Describe similarities and differences
→ Classifications, typologies
- Explain similarities and differences
→ Formulate/test hypotheses
- Make predictions
→Formulate expectations (of interventions/with respect to change)
evolution of comparative politics
initial: limited, focus on: western europe, north america, formal state institutions (=3state
powers), legal documents and texts
around ww2: new cases and behavioural revolution, focus on → breakdown of democracies,
populism in Latin America, socialism in Eastern Europe, decolonization, empirical behaviour,...
Consequences:
- More recognition of different political systems (not just one model)
- Greater focus on non-state actors (parties, interest groups, civil society, voters)
- Shift to empirical methods → data, statistics, large-N studies
- Move from case studies → variable-based analysis
- Higher level of theoretical abstraction
- Development of systemic functionalism (e.g. David Easton, Karl Deutsch)
- Emergence of the concept “political system”
Reaction to abstraction
● From universal → middle-range theories
● Focus on institutions (new institutionalism)
● Shift to small-N & case studies (QCA)
● Rise of Rational Choice Theory (rational, self-interested actors)
,And now
● Broader view of institutions
● Focus on output & throughput
● More interdependence between systems
● Mix of methods (quant + qual)
● Combine cases + variables
● Attention to differences (divergence)
What to compare
● Spatial → across countries/regions
● Functional → policies, actors, ideologies
● Longitudinal → over time
Role of theory in comparative politics
● Move beyond description → explanation
● Theories help analyze data
● Link micro (individual) ↔ macro (system)
● Two main types:
○ Positivist (facts = observable)
○ Constructivist (facts = socially constructed)
Empirical/comparative political theory
● Explains political phenomena
● Generates research questions
● Uses data + methods to test theory
● Triangulation = multiple methods/data/theories
Perspectives: Institutions
● Institutions shape behaviour
● Types: presidential vs parliamentary, unitary vs federal
● Path dependence (past choices matter)
● Weak at explaining change
Perspectives: Interests
● Politics = who gets what
● Focus on self-interest (Rational Choice Theory)
● Importance of groups (corporatism, networks, identity groups)
Perspectives: Ideas
● Culture, ideologies, policy ideas matter
● Political culture = hard to measure
● Examples:
, ○ Gabriel Almond & Sidney Verba
○ Robert Putnam (social capital)
● Ideas shape policy choices
Lecture 2
Democracy – basics
● Democracy = ideal + historical + real system
● Today = main source of legitimacy
● Often = liberal/representative democracy
Definitions of democracy
● Procedural (Schumpeter) → elections
● Substantive (Dahl) → participation + contestation (polyarchy)
Core features
● Free & fair elections
● Universal participation
● Civil liberties
● Accountable government
Measuring democracy
● Dichotomy → democracy vs dictatorship
● Continuous scale (e.g. Freedom House, V-Dem)
● Hybrid regimes / illiberal democracies
Types of democracy
● Parliamentary vs Presidential
● Consensus vs Majoritarian
Parliamentary vs Presidential
● Parliamentary → flexible, weaker head of state
● Presidential → strong president, strict separation of powers
● Semi-presidential → mix
Consensus vs Majoritarian
● Majoritarian → decisive but polarizing
● Consensus → inclusive but slower (veto players)
● Consensus often performs equal/better
, Polarization (article)
● Institutions affect polarization levels
● Consensus systems → less polarization
● PR, coalitions, federalism reduce polarization
Classifying systems
● Gabriel Almond & Sidney Verba → political culture
● Arend Lijphart → consensus vs majoritarian
● Gerring → centripetal vs decentralist
Democratization & backsliding
● Transition vs preservation
● Backsliding = gradual erosion
● Risk: executive power concentration
Factors stimulating democracy I
● Economic development (not always sufficient)
● Inequality → hinders democracy
● Institutions matter (e.g. presidential instability)
Factors stimulating democracy II
● Actors → leaders, social movements
● Non-violent resistance works better
● International influence (diffusion, aid)
Nature of democracy
● Not one thing → set of institutions
● Gradual differences (not yes/no)
● Many possible combinations
Performance of democracy
● Democracy ≠ automatically well-being
● Governance matters more than institutions alone
Governance
● Key = state capacity, rule of law, low corruption
● Strong impact on:
○ well-being
○ trust
○ legitimacy
