COMPARATIVE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS
Chapter 1: The relevance of comparative politics
1. What should comparative politics be relevant for?
1. For informing the elite
- Giving advice to parties on how to win election campaigns
- Comparative political scientists as consultants or advisors
- To “speak truth to power”
- Problem: public policies are connected to a specific orientation → science should only focus on finding the
truth and not supporting an ideology
2. For informing the general public
- Commenting on current political affairs, giving lectures, …
- It cannot be a disadvantage to the quality of debate about public policies if people with more knowledge
choose to participate.
- Problem: paternalism: should the choice of policies not be left to the citizens? What rights have the
academic elite to tell ordinary people what is best for them?
Amartya Sen: ‘capability theory of justice’: “a just society provides people with effective opportunities
to undertake actions that they have reason to value, and be the person that they have reason to want to
be” → basic resources for everyone
For what is comparative politics relevant? Its potential for increasing human well-being
2. Political institutions and human well-being
In the past: political institutions were seen merely as a superficial reflection or as the ‘superstructure’ of
underlying structural forces → no impact on well-being of a country
→ ‘The institutional turn’
- Importance of institutions for explaining why some countries were more prosperous than others.
- Led to ‘new institutionalism’ and ‘historical institutionalism’.
1) The institutional turn and comparative politics
Example: the issue of access to safe water
→ The main problem seems to lie within the judicial and administrative institutions, so a dysfunctional state
apparatus. The cause is NOT limited access to natural clean water or technical solutions.
Empirical research shows that the ability to become a ‘successful society’ is decided by the quality of the
political institutions.
→ Can comparative political science contribute to increased human well-being by
- Specifying which political institutions are most likely to increase human well-being.
- How institutions can come about.
2) Institutions rule - but which?
There is little consensus on which particular political institutions matter.
The importance of the informal institutions in society should not be overlooked and the importance of formal
institutions has often been exaggerated.
→ E.g. the degree of social trust has an impact on human well-being.
There is also a large discussion about whether the institutions that regulate access to power (party systems) are
more important than the institutions that regulate the exercise of power (rule of law).
1
, 3. The many faces of democracy
From a capability theory → not all democracies produce high levels of human well-being
We tend to speak about democracy as a single institution, but it is a system built on multiple separate
institutions → democratic theory does NOT provide precise answers to how these institutions should be
constructed.
4. Democracy and state capacity
The nature of the institutions is the most important factor for well-being.
Research on democratization: how, when and why countries shift from various forms of authoritarian rule to
electoral representative democracies.
- More countries than ever are now democratic.
- BUT: on almost all standard measures of human well-being, China now clearly outperforms liberal and
democratically governed India.
- There is no positive effect of democracy on the level of child deprivation for any of the seven
indicators. One argument against this is that it is unrealistic to expect high capacity of new
democracies.
1) The spectre that is haunting democracy
Why had democratization not resulted in more human well-being?
→ It is bad governance - governance that serves only the interests of a narrow ruling elite.
Without control of corruption and increased administrative capacity, the life situation of citizens will not
improve.
2) State capacity, quality of government, and human well-being
Other studies largely confirm that various measures of a state’s administrative capacity, quality of government,
levels of corruption, and other measures of ‘good governance’ have strong effects on almost all standard
measures of human well-being.
There is a huge difference in the correlations between one often-used measure of democracy and a measure of
‘bad governance’ for the Human Development Index produced by the UN Development Program.
→ Look at figure 1.1 and 1.2 (p. 28-29)
5. Does democracy generate political legitimacy?
The normative reasons for representative democracy should not be performance measures like the ones
mentioned above, but political legitimacy.
→ Several studies show that ‘performance’ or ‘output’ measures, such as control of corruption, trump
democratic rights in explaining political legitimacy.
→ Government effectiveness is of greater importance for citizens’ satisfaction with the way democracy
functions, compared to factors such as ideological congruence on the input side.
(Actually, very few people even use their democratic rights)
If a liberal democracy system is going to produce increased human well-being around the world, quality-of-
government factors such as administrative capacity, the rule of law, and control of corruption must be taken
into account.
1) Does democracy cure corruption?
In many democracies, corrupt politicians often get re-elected! → Some say democracies allow for more
corruption (but this is NOT a general law).
2
, 6. What should be explained?
Most important institutions for high level of human development: institutions on the output side of the
political system (= legal system and public administration)
→ Implications for comparative political research:
- Human well-being must be the main dependent variable
- Political institutions on the output side should be central
Instead of just explaining politics → more focus on what politics implies for human well-being
1) Statistical significances vs. real-life significance
- There is also a normative perspective for the choice of which explanatory variables should be central.
- Researchers sometimes confuse the notion of statistical significance with real-life significance
Independent variables are also very important in comparative politics!
2) Quality of government, social trust, and human well-being
‘The institutional turn’: one such institution is the degree to which people in a society can trust most other
people.
→ Social trust correlates with many measures of human well-being
→ The idea is that social trust is generated ‘from below’ (voluntary associations) (this is not proved though).
3) The role of formal and informal institutions
Institution-centred approach: for social trust to flourish, it needs to be embedded in and linked to the political
context + formal political and legal institutions.
→ To create social trust and social capital (a high level of social trust is strongly correlated with a low level of
corruption).
The major source of variations in social trust is at the output side (branches of the state that are responsible
for the implementation of public policies).
3
, Chapter 2: Approaches in comparative politics
1. Introduction
The political world provides governance for society. Given the high complexity of political systems and the wide
range of variation between them across the world, it is important to develop approaches that are useful across
them all and not simply in single countries. Political theories are the sources of the approaches to comparison.
There is a difference between positivist and constructivist approaches to politics.
Positivism
- A fact/value distinction, implying that there are real facts that are observable and verifiable in the
same way by different individuals.
- Most political science and comparative politics is founded on positivist assumptions.
Constructivism
- The individual researcher cannot stand outside political phenomena as an objective observer, but
rather to some extent imposes his/her own social and cultural understandings on the observed
phenomena.
-
2. Uses of theory in comparison
Without the capacity to compare across political systems, it is almost impossible to understand the scientific
importance of findings made in a single country.
- Without empirical political theory, effective research might be impossible.
- Without theory, comparative politics would be a mere collection of information. However, theories
and approaches should never become blinders for the researcher. We should investigate the same
question from different angles.
One crucial function of theory in comparative politics is to link micro- and macro-behaviour.
- Micro-level: understand individual choice.
- Institutions shape the behaviour of individuals and individuals shape institutions.
Triangulation
- If we explore the same data with several alternative theories or approaches, we become more open to
findings that do not confirm one or another approach.
Quantitative and qualitative
- If we could collect several forms of data, then we could have a better idea whether the findings were
valid.
Major approaches to comparative politics
Structural functionalism
- Identify the necessary activities of all political systems and compare the manner in which these
functions were performed.
Systems theory
- Considered the structures of the public sector as an open system that had extensive input and output
interaction with its environment.
Marxism
- Class conflict is an interest-based explanation of differences among political systems.
Corporatism
4
Chapter 1: The relevance of comparative politics
1. What should comparative politics be relevant for?
1. For informing the elite
- Giving advice to parties on how to win election campaigns
- Comparative political scientists as consultants or advisors
- To “speak truth to power”
- Problem: public policies are connected to a specific orientation → science should only focus on finding the
truth and not supporting an ideology
2. For informing the general public
- Commenting on current political affairs, giving lectures, …
- It cannot be a disadvantage to the quality of debate about public policies if people with more knowledge
choose to participate.
- Problem: paternalism: should the choice of policies not be left to the citizens? What rights have the
academic elite to tell ordinary people what is best for them?
Amartya Sen: ‘capability theory of justice’: “a just society provides people with effective opportunities
to undertake actions that they have reason to value, and be the person that they have reason to want to
be” → basic resources for everyone
For what is comparative politics relevant? Its potential for increasing human well-being
2. Political institutions and human well-being
In the past: political institutions were seen merely as a superficial reflection or as the ‘superstructure’ of
underlying structural forces → no impact on well-being of a country
→ ‘The institutional turn’
- Importance of institutions for explaining why some countries were more prosperous than others.
- Led to ‘new institutionalism’ and ‘historical institutionalism’.
1) The institutional turn and comparative politics
Example: the issue of access to safe water
→ The main problem seems to lie within the judicial and administrative institutions, so a dysfunctional state
apparatus. The cause is NOT limited access to natural clean water or technical solutions.
Empirical research shows that the ability to become a ‘successful society’ is decided by the quality of the
political institutions.
→ Can comparative political science contribute to increased human well-being by
- Specifying which political institutions are most likely to increase human well-being.
- How institutions can come about.
2) Institutions rule - but which?
There is little consensus on which particular political institutions matter.
The importance of the informal institutions in society should not be overlooked and the importance of formal
institutions has often been exaggerated.
→ E.g. the degree of social trust has an impact on human well-being.
There is also a large discussion about whether the institutions that regulate access to power (party systems) are
more important than the institutions that regulate the exercise of power (rule of law).
1
, 3. The many faces of democracy
From a capability theory → not all democracies produce high levels of human well-being
We tend to speak about democracy as a single institution, but it is a system built on multiple separate
institutions → democratic theory does NOT provide precise answers to how these institutions should be
constructed.
4. Democracy and state capacity
The nature of the institutions is the most important factor for well-being.
Research on democratization: how, when and why countries shift from various forms of authoritarian rule to
electoral representative democracies.
- More countries than ever are now democratic.
- BUT: on almost all standard measures of human well-being, China now clearly outperforms liberal and
democratically governed India.
- There is no positive effect of democracy on the level of child deprivation for any of the seven
indicators. One argument against this is that it is unrealistic to expect high capacity of new
democracies.
1) The spectre that is haunting democracy
Why had democratization not resulted in more human well-being?
→ It is bad governance - governance that serves only the interests of a narrow ruling elite.
Without control of corruption and increased administrative capacity, the life situation of citizens will not
improve.
2) State capacity, quality of government, and human well-being
Other studies largely confirm that various measures of a state’s administrative capacity, quality of government,
levels of corruption, and other measures of ‘good governance’ have strong effects on almost all standard
measures of human well-being.
There is a huge difference in the correlations between one often-used measure of democracy and a measure of
‘bad governance’ for the Human Development Index produced by the UN Development Program.
→ Look at figure 1.1 and 1.2 (p. 28-29)
5. Does democracy generate political legitimacy?
The normative reasons for representative democracy should not be performance measures like the ones
mentioned above, but political legitimacy.
→ Several studies show that ‘performance’ or ‘output’ measures, such as control of corruption, trump
democratic rights in explaining political legitimacy.
→ Government effectiveness is of greater importance for citizens’ satisfaction with the way democracy
functions, compared to factors such as ideological congruence on the input side.
(Actually, very few people even use their democratic rights)
If a liberal democracy system is going to produce increased human well-being around the world, quality-of-
government factors such as administrative capacity, the rule of law, and control of corruption must be taken
into account.
1) Does democracy cure corruption?
In many democracies, corrupt politicians often get re-elected! → Some say democracies allow for more
corruption (but this is NOT a general law).
2
, 6. What should be explained?
Most important institutions for high level of human development: institutions on the output side of the
political system (= legal system and public administration)
→ Implications for comparative political research:
- Human well-being must be the main dependent variable
- Political institutions on the output side should be central
Instead of just explaining politics → more focus on what politics implies for human well-being
1) Statistical significances vs. real-life significance
- There is also a normative perspective for the choice of which explanatory variables should be central.
- Researchers sometimes confuse the notion of statistical significance with real-life significance
Independent variables are also very important in comparative politics!
2) Quality of government, social trust, and human well-being
‘The institutional turn’: one such institution is the degree to which people in a society can trust most other
people.
→ Social trust correlates with many measures of human well-being
→ The idea is that social trust is generated ‘from below’ (voluntary associations) (this is not proved though).
3) The role of formal and informal institutions
Institution-centred approach: for social trust to flourish, it needs to be embedded in and linked to the political
context + formal political and legal institutions.
→ To create social trust and social capital (a high level of social trust is strongly correlated with a low level of
corruption).
The major source of variations in social trust is at the output side (branches of the state that are responsible
for the implementation of public policies).
3
, Chapter 2: Approaches in comparative politics
1. Introduction
The political world provides governance for society. Given the high complexity of political systems and the wide
range of variation between them across the world, it is important to develop approaches that are useful across
them all and not simply in single countries. Political theories are the sources of the approaches to comparison.
There is a difference between positivist and constructivist approaches to politics.
Positivism
- A fact/value distinction, implying that there are real facts that are observable and verifiable in the
same way by different individuals.
- Most political science and comparative politics is founded on positivist assumptions.
Constructivism
- The individual researcher cannot stand outside political phenomena as an objective observer, but
rather to some extent imposes his/her own social and cultural understandings on the observed
phenomena.
-
2. Uses of theory in comparison
Without the capacity to compare across political systems, it is almost impossible to understand the scientific
importance of findings made in a single country.
- Without empirical political theory, effective research might be impossible.
- Without theory, comparative politics would be a mere collection of information. However, theories
and approaches should never become blinders for the researcher. We should investigate the same
question from different angles.
One crucial function of theory in comparative politics is to link micro- and macro-behaviour.
- Micro-level: understand individual choice.
- Institutions shape the behaviour of individuals and individuals shape institutions.
Triangulation
- If we explore the same data with several alternative theories or approaches, we become more open to
findings that do not confirm one or another approach.
Quantitative and qualitative
- If we could collect several forms of data, then we could have a better idea whether the findings were
valid.
Major approaches to comparative politics
Structural functionalism
- Identify the necessary activities of all political systems and compare the manner in which these
functions were performed.
Systems theory
- Considered the structures of the public sector as an open system that had extensive input and output
interaction with its environment.
Marxism
- Class conflict is an interest-based explanation of differences among political systems.
Corporatism
4
