Page 1 of 3

University Press Scholarship Online

You are looking at 1-5 of 5 items for: keywords : comparative polref
A New Handbook of Political Science
Robert E. Goodin and Hans-Dieter Klingemann (eds)
Published in print: 1998 Published Online:
November 2003
ISBN: 9780198294719 eISBN: 9780191599361
Item type: book
Publisher: Oxford University Press
DOI: 10.1093/0198294719.001.0001
Includes contributions from over 40 political scientists from around
the world and surveys developments in the discipline over the past 20
years. Discusses each of the main subdisciplines: political institutions,
political behaviour, comparative politics, international relations, political
theory, public policy, administration of political economy, and political
methodology.
Comparative Politics: An Overview
Peter Mair
in A New Handbook of Political Science
Published in print: 1998 Published Online:
November 2003
ISBN: 9780198294719 eISBN: 9780191599361
Item type: chapter
Publisher: Oxford University Press
DOI: 10.1093/0198294719.003.0012
Provides an overview of the field of comparative politics, tracing
changes from abstraction and generalization to midlevel analysis
caused by changes in methodological techniques. Restriction in scope
has led to institutional specificities and the analysis of the political as
an independent variable. Key questions now relate to what politics
does rather than what politics is. Specialization, internationalization,
and professionalism are the new watchwords of comparative politics.
Methodological consequences and issues are discussed.
Page 2 of 3
Comparative Politics: MicroBehavioral Perspectives
Russell J. Dalton
in A New Handbook of Political Science
Published in print: 1998 Published Online:
November 2003
ISBN: 9780198294719 eISBN: 9780191599361
Item type: chapter
Publisher: Oxford University Press
DOI: 10.1093/0198294719.003.0013
Political events and democratization have created emerging questions
for the analysis of comparative politics. This provides opportunities to
test the role of political culture, voting preferences, and the link between
political norms and behaviour prior to stable democracies in equilibrium,
on which formerly research has focused. Major advances in comparative
political behaviour reflect the individualization of electoral behaviour in
value change and modernization, and the contribution of political culture
due to patterns of democratization.
Comparative Politics, Old and New
David E. Apter
in A New Handbook of Political Science
Published in print: 1998 Published Online:
November 2003
ISBN: 9780198294719 eISBN: 9780191599361
Item type: chapter
Publisher: Oxford University Press
DOI: 10.1093/0198294719.003.0015
Traces the development of intellectual traditions in comparative politics
from the old to the new. Old comparative politics reflects a focus
on institutionalism and new comparative politics has arisen in part
because of the end of the Cold War, devolution of powers, the rise of
social democracy in Europe, decolonization, and democratization. We
are now witnessing neoinstitutionalism, characterized by a restoration
of the political to centre stage, the use of rational choice perspectives,
and economic analysis due to the importance of market forces and
globalization.
Public Policy and Administration: Comparative Policy Analysis
Richard I. Hofferbert and David Louis Cingranelli
in A New Handbook of Political Science
Published in print: 1998 Published Online:
November 2003
ISBN: 9780198294719 eISBN: 9780191599361
Item type: chapter
Publisher: Oxford University Press
DOI: 10.1093/0198294719.003.0025
Page 3 of 3
How can we explain policy similarities and differences across time,
jurisdiction, and country? Examples are offered in a comparison of social
and economic context, the role of institutions, ideology, democratic
type, industrialization, and social change as they account for two
political outcomes: welfare policy and party election programs. Key
methodological and theoretical issues are raised, relating to the
empirical demands of causality and contingency. How politics matters is
ultimately left unanswered because of methodological indeterminacies,
though three findings remain: policies are not made in a socioeconomic
vacuum, institutional effects are still an open question, and policy
conditions are attributable to partisan conditions.