How to Compare Countries Lecture 3

1
How to Compare CountriesLecture 3

• Michaelmas Term 2004
• Dr. David Rueda

2
Today

• Main Points from Last Weeks Lecture
• Choosing Cases in Theory-Driven Small N Analysis.
• Problems of Most Different and Most Similar
  Systems Design.
• The Boolean Method, AKA Qualitative Comparative
  Analysis (QCA).
• The Boolean Method in Practice.
• An Example Qualitative Comparative Analysis of
  Union Growth and Decline.
• Problems of QCA Analysis.
• A Brief History of Comparative Methods.
• Next?

3
Main Points from Last Weeks Lecture Choosing
Cases in Theory-Driven Small N Analysis

• The nature of Small N comparison
• Comparing means choosing variables are cases
  comparable with respect to which properties or
  characteristics? or incomparable with respect to
  which properties or characteristics?
• Our cases will be similar in some respects and
  different in others.
• If we could manipulate variables at will, we
  would do experimental method.
• We cannot, so we try to take advantage of the
  similarities and differences we see in nature.
• Two main approaches most-similar and
  most-different designs.

4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
Main Points from Last Weeks Lecture Problems of
Most Different and Most Similar Systems Design
(1).

• General issues
• All potential causal factors need to be
  identified and included in the analysis.
• Generality problem unknown representativeness of
  the cases chosen.
• The dichotomous nature of variables mean a loss
  of information.
• Problems with multiple causation (even
  interaction effects are difficult to measure).
• Absence of probabilistic assessment.
• Number of causes and number of cases must be
  small (or method becomes unmanageable).
• Causal connection?
• I will not emphasize (1) but will analyze the
  rest in more detail.

7
Main Points from Last Weeks Lecture Problems of
Most Different and Most Similar Systems Design
(2).

• Generality problem unknown representativeness of
  the cases chosen.
• Lijphart many variables, small number of
  cases. Example how representative is Skocpols
  analysis of France, Russia and China?
• The small N is associated with selection bias
  (King, Keohane, and Verba 1994 and Collier 1995).
  Example criticism of Skocpol in Geddes (1991).
• The dichotomous nature of variables means a loss
  of information
• It virtually eliminates the possibility of
  analyzing anything but the limited phenomena that
  can be defined in terms of the existence or
  inexistence of a quality. Example Skocpols
  revolutions (but how about degree of
  international threat, the power of landed
  classes, etc?)
• How about growth, inequality, etc?

8
Main Points from Last Weeks Lecture Problems of
Most Different and Most Similar Systems Design
(3).

• Problems with multiple causation
• It cannot seriously consider multiple causation
  (either A C or B D cause E).
• Absence of probabilistic assessment
• Not knowing the frequency of a particular
  combination of causes and outcomes can give the
  same analytical weight to extremely unlikely
  events. If the goal is to discover theoretically
  relevant patterns, the Millian disregard for the
  probability of the factors seems
  counter-intuitive.
• Number of causes and number of cases must be
  small
• Ragin (1987) Mills method is extremely
  complicated even with an only slightly large
  number of cases (the number of combinations for
  causal conditions gets out of hand very fast).
• Causal connection?
• Mills method only address correlation. The
  historical analysis can resolve this (like in
  Skocpol), but causation is left to the
  case-study. Mills techniques do not really help.

9
The Boolean Method, AKA Qualitative Comparative
Analysis (QCA)

• Charles Ragin The Comparative Method.
• The distinction between QCA and Mills methods
  (according to Ragin)
• Mills approach is a Case-Oriented Comparative
  Method.
• The Boolean approach is a Synthetic Comparative
  Strategy.
• The advantages of QCA (according to Ragin)
• QCA is the only truly synthetic approach (not a
  combined approach that adds quantitative and
  qualitative analyses).
• QCA can produce the benefits of both quantitative
  and qualitative designs without having to pay the
  price for either.
• Boolean arithmetic allows researchers to assess
  conjunctural causation and to examine large
  numbers of cases.
• Alternative interpretation
• QCA is jus a a mathematical extension of Mills
  methods (Janoski and Hicks 1994).
• QCA perhaps allows us a greater degree of causal
  sophistication, but it is also vulnerable to most
  criticisms already directed towards Mills
  approach.

10
The Boolean Method in Practice (1)

• Use of binary data.
• Use of truth table to represent data
• Identify variables.
• Recode data into binary variables.
• Present combinations in a truth table.
• Hypothetical example (in Ragins The Comparative
  Method)
• Variables are
• The outcome regime failure
• The conditions conflict between older and
  younger military officers, death of dictator, and
  CIA dissatisfaction wit regime.
• We have a number of cases that can be arranged in
  8 combinations.

11
(No Transcript)
12
The Boolean Method in Practice (2)

• In this case
• F Abc or aBc or abC or ABc or AbC or aBC or
  ABC.
• Next step Boolean minimization.
• If two combinations differ in only one factor but
  produce the same result, then that factor is
  irrelevant.
• In the example, we can identify and reduce the
  following combinations
• Abc and ABc reduce to Ac Abc and AbC reduce to
  Ab aBc and ABc reduce to Bc aBc and aBC reduce
  to aB abC and AbC reduce to bC abC and aBC
  reduce to aC ABc and ABC reduce to AB AbC and
  ABC reduce to AC and AbC and ABC reduce to BC.
• The resulting reduced combinations are
• F Ac or Ab or Bc or aB or bC or aC or AB or AC
  or BC.
• Now we minimize again
• Ab and AB reduce to A Ac and AC reduce to A aB
  and AB reduce to B Bc and BC reduce to B aC and
  AC reduce to C and bC and BC reduce to C.
• FINAL RESULT F A or B or C.

13
An Example Qualitative Comparative Analysis of
Union Growth and Decline (1).

• Griffin et al. 1991. Theoretical Generality,
  Case Particularity Qualitative Comparative
  Analysis of Trade Union Growth and Decline.
  International Journal of Comparative Sociology,
  (32) 1-2 110-36.
• General methodological points about QCA made by
  Griffin et al
• The selection of cases in comparative studies
  should capture all possible variation in the
  factors of interest (i.e. no probabilistic
  considerations).
• Neither case-studies nor large-N studies are
  optimal approaches to many comparative problems.
• Boolean algebra is the right method in those
  cases defined by a relatively large number of
  cases, causal heterogeneity, and the expectation
  of delimited theoretical generalizations (p.
  110).
• QCA is analytically formal, generating inferences
  by a process of data reduction based on Boolean
  algebra and mimicking the logic of the
  experimental method.

14
An Example Qualitative Comparative Analysis of
Union Growth and Decline (2).

• Outcome union growth and union extraordinary
  decline.
• Explanatory conditions
• Labor relations (7 variables)
• Corporatism (existence of strong, strong-medium,
  or weak corporatism).
• Existence of pluralist labor relations.
• Existence of concertation without labor.
• Existence of union-provided unemployment
  benefits.
• Existence of state or corporate anti-unionism.
• Change in strikes (large upsurge of labor
  militancy).
• Economic factors (3 variable)
• Economic decline (decline in inflation and
  increase in unemployment are abnormally large).
• Economic growth (inflation rates did not
  plummet and unemployment rate fell or increase
  only moderately).
• Service sector (large increases, compared to
  other countries in the sample, of service sector
  employment).

15
An Example Qualitative Comparative Analysis of
Union Growth and Decline (3).

• Truth table
• 11 explanatory conditions and 2 outcomes.
• 18 combinations in 18 countries.
• Results of QCA analysis
• Two combinations for union loss
• Services, no strikes, no union-provided
  unemployment benefits, no strong corporatism, and
  no economic growth OR
• Existence of state or corporate anti-unionism, no
  services, no strikes, no union-provided
  unemployment benefits, and no economic growth.
• One combination for union gain
• No Services, existence of union-provided
  unemployment benefits, existence of strong or
  medium corporatism, no state or corporate
  anti-unionism, and no economic growth.

16
Problems of QCA Analysis (1)

• Problems we had with most different and most
  similar designs
• All potential causal factors need to be
  identified and included in the analysis.
• Generality problem unknown representativeness of
  the cases chosen.
• The dichotomous nature of variables mean a loss
  of information.
• Problems with multiple causation (even
  interaction effects are difficult to measure).
• Absence of probabilistic assessment.
• Number of causes and number of cases must be
  small (or method becomes unmanageable).
• Causal connection?
• We can (possibly) eliminate (4). But the rest
  are still problems.

17
Problems of QCA Analysis (2)

• All potential causal factors need to be
  identified and included in the analysis.
• They are not Could it be smaller working places
  that explain union decline? Could it
  globalization and increasing low wage
  competition? Etc.
• Generality problem unknown representativeness of
  the cases chosen.
• How representative are the 18 countries (in the
  1970s and 1980s)?
• What is our sample and what is our universe of
  cases?
• The dichotomous nature of variables means a loss
  of information
• Example To be classified as a union loss, for
  example, a nation must fall below the mean of
  loser nations in both membership and union
  density and must have experienced a decline for
  at least four consecutive years (union gain,
  however, is any increase in union density).
• Another example Economic decline is measured
  when decline in inflation and increase in
  unemployment are abnormally large.

18
Problems of QCA Analysis (3)

• Absence of probabilistic assessment
• The authors argument that (w)hat is important
  is not the number of cases analyzed but the
  notion that analysts ideally should theorize the
  population of interest and then explore all of
  its instances or cases and therefore all of the
  theoretically relevant comparative variation is
  odd.
• Not knowing the frequency of a particular
  combination of causes and outcomes can give the
  same analytical weight to extremely unlikely
  events. If the goal is to discover theoretically
  relevant patterns, QCAs disregard for the
  probability of the factors seems
  counter-intuitive.
• Number of causes and number of cases must be
  small
• Ragin (1987) Mills method is extremely
  complicated even with an only slightly large
  number of cases (the number of combinations for
  causal conditions gets out of hand very fast).
• Griffin et al (p. 130) As we entered additional
  variables into the Boolean equations, we
  typically found that both the number of causal
  factors in each combination and the number of
  configurations increased sharply (). It was
  rather easy, in fact, to generate virtually as
  many configurations as we have cases.

19
Problems of QCA Analysis (4)

• Causal connection?
• QCA only address correlation. It emphasizes
  causation even less than Mills methods. The
  historical analysis can resolve this, but
  increasing the number of cases to 18 (like in
  Griffin et al) makes case studies impossible.
• Conclusion
• QCA may be an interesting method for some
  questions but
• It is not without problems.
• There are other ways of doing theory-driven small
  N analysis.
• One of them making qualitative analysis more
  systematic (KKV)
• Another combining methods (triangulation).
• We will talk about these last two issues next
  week but first we need a very brief summary of
  the development of comparative methodology.

20
A Brief History of Comparative Methods (1)

• The state of comparative politics in 1953, Roy
  Macridis in the American Political Science
  Review
• Some of the major characteristics of the
  comparative approach
• Essentially noncomparative (T)he vast majority
  of publications in the field of comparative
  government deal either with one country or with
  parallel descriptions of the institutions of a
  number of countries.
• Essentially descriptive Either historical or
  legalistic and not contributing much to
  explanation.
• Essentially static Emphasizing comparative
  government, rather than comparative politics.
• Is the literature in political science better now?

21
A Brief History of Comparative Methods (2)

• Things that have changed
• In 1954, the Social Science Research Council
  founded the Committee on Comparative Politics,
  which became an influential promotor of
  comparative political science.
• The definition of the subject has been extended
  more comparative politics (not only comparative
  government).
• The geographic area of interest has been
  extended.
• In the 1960s and 1970s, new techniques emerge in
  data processing and computer technology. More
  statistical work.
• The division between qualitative and quantitative
  work emerges as well.
• Next week KKV as a way to move away from the
  qualitative/quantitative divide.

22
A Brief History of Comparative Methods (3)

• Is the qualitative/quantitative divide the only
  one?
• Other divisions (Grofman in Renwick Monroe 1997)
  
• Normative vs. empirical.
• Description vs. explanation.
• Induction vs. deduction.
• Scope (I would say generalizability) vs.
  certainty.
• Exegesis (most important questions have been
  answered in the Great Books) vs. exploration.
• Government focus vs. policy (or rather power, who
  gets what, when how) focus.
• Understanding (reality) vs. (wanting to) change
  (it).

23
Next?

• Week 8 New approaches. Triangulation of
  methods. Summary.