Methods for Studying Inequality: Comparative Subnational Analysis

1
Methods for Studying InequalityComparative
Subnational Analysis

• Richard Snyder
• Department of Political Science
• Brown University
• June 10, 2009

2
Outline

• Mapping the Field of Methodological Options
  Experimental, Large-N, and Small-N Research
  Designs
• Overview of the Subnational Comparative Method
  Strengths and Weaknesses
• Strategies of Subnational Comparative Research
• Within-Country Comparisons
• Between-Country Comparisons
• Multi-Methods Approaches Combining Subnational
  Comparisons with Other Methods

3
The Menu of Methodological Options
4
Experiments

• Strengths
• Eliminates rival explanations through
  experimental control (i.e., random assignment of
  units to treatment).
• Establishes direction of causality (Internal
  Validity)

• Weaknesses
• Not viable for practical or ethical reasons.
• Hard to study important questions and problems
  that we care about (e.g., history).
• Requires lots of a priori knowledge about
  plausible independent variables and
  well-specified causal model.
• Requires lots of a priori contextual knowledge.
• Difficult to generalize from sample to population
  (external validity)

Sources Collier (1991) Munck and Verkuilen
(2005).
5
A typical row of the random assignment matrix
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Co-ethnic/ cousin
Co-ethnic/ non-cousin
Non-coethnic/ cousin
Non-coethnic/ non-cousin
Same name
No name
Source T. Dunning
6
Large-N Studies

• Strengths
• Assesses rival explanations through statistical
  control
• Establishing generalizability (external
  validity)

• Weaknesses
• Difficult to collect adequate information in a
  sufficient number of cases, due to limited time
  and resources
• Association is not causation Lack of attention
  to causal mechanims (internal validity)
• Measurement validity is harder to establish the
  larger the N and the larger the number of
  variables

7
Small-N Studies

• Strengths
• Given inevitable scarcity of time, energy, and
  financial resources, the intensive analysis of a
  few cases may be more promising than the
  superficial statistical analysis of many cases
  (Lijphart, 1971).
• The study of causal mechanisms via within- and
  cross-case analysis, offers a basis for assessing
  causality (internal validity).
• A powerful tool for theory generation
• Measurement validity is easier to establish the
  smaller the N.

• Weaknesses
• Limited capacity to sort out rival explanations.
  The problem of many variables, few cases.
• Difficult to generalize from sample to population
  (external validity)

8
Subnational Comparative Analysis (SCA)

• Strengths

• Weaknesses

• Mitigates the too many variables, too few cases
  problem by (1) increasing the number of
  observations and (2) reducing the number of
  variables through controlled comparisons.
• Increased validity of concepts and measures
  Beyond Whole-Nation Bias
• Makes it easier to build theories of spatially
  uneven processes and phenomena.
• Feasibility. Carrying out subnational
  comparisons may require less resources than
  cross-country comparisons.

• Difficult to generalize from sample to population
  (external validity)
• Data requirements.
• Non-Independence of units Galtons Problem.

9
regional diversity by per capita GDP
10
The Bottom Line

• There is no perfect method!
• Methodological pluralism is thus the wisest
  wager for the social sciences.

11
Strategies of Subnational Comparative Analysis

• Within-Nation SCA
• A. Kohli The State and Poverty in India (1987)
• R. Snyder Politics after Neoliberalism (2001)
• A. Varshney Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life
  (2002)
• G. Baiocchi, P. Heller, and M. Silva Making
  Space for Civil Society (2008)
• Between-Nation SCA
• S.M. Lipset Agrarian Socialism (1950)
• A. I. Asiwaju Partitioned Africans (1985)
• P. Sahlins BoundariesThe Making of France and
  Spain in the Pyrenees (1989)
• W. Miles Hausaland Divided (1994)
• D. Posner The Political Salience of Cultural
  Differences (2004)

12
Matched Subnational Comparisons
Source Baiocchi, et al., 2008.
13
Source Baiocchi, et al., 2008.
14
State-Level Economic Growth Rate (1960-2007)Per
Annum

• 1960-80 1981-2007
• All-India Average 3.4 5.7
• Hindi-speaking North
• Bihar 2.7 4.4
• Madhya Pradesh 2.6 4.2
• Rajasthan 2.9 5.6
• Uttar Pradesh 2.8 4.5
• Average 2.8 4.7
• Southern States
• Andhra Pradesh 3.1 6.0
• Karnataka 3.7 5.8
• Kerala 3.1 5.6
• Tamil Nadu 2.3 5.7
• Average 3.1 5.8
• South/North Ratio 1.1 1.2

15
State-Level Economic Growth Rate (1960-2007)Per
Capita Per Annum

• 1960-80 1981-2007
• Hindi-speaking North
• Bihar 0.6 1.5
• Madhya Pradesh 0.1 2.0
• Rajasthan 0.2 3.2
• Uttar Pradesh 0.7 1.8
• Average 0.4 2.1
• Southern States
• Andhra Pradesh 1.0 4.3
• Karnataka 1.3 3.9
• Kerala 1.0 4.6
• Tamil Nadu 0.9 4.5
• Average 1.1 4.3
• South/North Ratio 2.77 2.04

16
Growth of Enterprises
17
Growth of Rural Enterprises
18
Growth of Urban Enterprises
19
The Wheat Belt
20
(No Transcript)
21
A Between-Country Subnational Comparative
Analysis Why Chewas and Tumbukas Are Allies in
Zambia and Adversaries in Malawi
Source Posner, 2004.
22
Source Posner (2004)
23
(No Transcript)