Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Comparative Policy Analysis
Show Less

Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Comparative Policy Analysis

Edited by B. Guy Peters and Guillaume Fontaine

Public policy research has become increasingly comparative over the past several decades, but the methodological issues involved in this research have not been discussed adequately. This Handbook provides a discussion of the fundamental methodological issues in comparative policy research, as well as descriptions and analyses of major techniques used for that research. The techniques discussed are both quantitative and qualitative, and all are embedded in the broader discussion of comparative research design.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 14: Causal case studies for comparative policy analysis

Derek Beach

Abstract

Case-based approaches to studying public policy have the goal of learning about how policy processes actually operate within real world cases. In a case-based approach, the analytical priority is the in-depth study of operative processes within a case. Comparisons act as an adjunct method used to map populations into smaller, relatively homogeneous subsets that enable us to select relevant cases for within-case analysis. The upside of using case-based approaches to study public policy is that we learn a lot about how a policy intervention works in a given context, and the conditions required for it to work in a particular way. The downside is that our knowledge claims are relatively context-specific. Given that the core analysis is within-case, a core challenge in policy studies is assessing whether similar processes are operative in multiple cases. The crux of the challenge is that studying how policy processes play out within cases requires that we significantly lower the level of abstraction of our analysis. However, this means that our findings about how processes play out in particular cases become highly sensitive to contextual differences across cases, meaning that it can be difficult to make meaningful generalizations about how policy processes actually work that hold for cases in different contexts. This chapter uncovers the fundamental ontological and epistemological assumptions that distinguish case-based from variance-based approaches. It presents how case-based methods that combine the comparative mapping of a set of cases and the in-depth tracing of mechanisms (i.e. processes) within multiple cases in this bounded population enable valid causal inferences to be made about policy processes operative within cases that share a set of contextual conditions (aka scope conditions).

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.