IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/intare/v3y2000i2p141-177.html

A Review on the Methodological Arguments in the Study of Comparative Politics

Author

Listed:
  • Mun Hee Kang

Abstract

This paper seeks to explain three distinctive trends of methodological arguments in the contemporary study of comparative politics, which are positivists, realists, and statists. On these three approaches, there is no consensus among scholars about which one is the most appropriate to the comparative study of different nation-states. The purpose of this paper is to identify the strength and weakness in the conflicting arguments found in three approaches. This involves an overall analysis of the various ontological perspectives, different problem perceptions, and future alternatives. In this comparative review, this paper also attempts to present inherent problems in each trend.

Suggested Citation

  • Mun Hee Kang, 2000. "A Review on the Methodological Arguments in the Study of Comparative Politics," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 3(2), pages 141-177, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:141-177
    DOI: 10.1177/223386590000300208
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/223386590000300208
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/223386590000300208?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:apsrev:v:65:y:1971:i:03:p:682-693_13 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Almond, Gabriel A., 1988. "The Return to the State," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 82(3), pages 853-874, September.
    3. repec:cup:apsrev:v:63:y:1969:i:04:p:1051-1061_26 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rachel M. Gisselquist, 2018. "Legal empowerment and group-based inequality," WIDER Working Paper Series 039, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Yonn Dierwechter, 2013. "Smart Growth and State Territoriality," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(11), pages 2275-2292, August.
    3. Katzenstein, Peter Joachim, 1990. "Analyzing change in international politics: The new institutionalism and the interpretative approach," MPIfG Discussion Paper 90/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. Keith Dowding, 1994. "The Compatibility of Behaviouralism, Rational Choice and `New Institutionalism'," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 6(1), pages 105-117, January.
    5. Heather Whiteside, 2023. "State capitalism as Lazarus meets Loch Ness: Insights from the Asiatic mode of production," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 55(3), pages 788-792, May.
    6. Biebricher, Thomas, 2012. "Foucault, Gouvernementalität und Staatstheorie," TranState Working Papers 164, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    7. Henry Jacob Festus Ssekibuule D. Admin, 2019. "The Plight of Women Against Housing Challenges in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa," Journal of Public Administration and Governance, Macrothink Institute, vol. 9(4), pages 118-128, December.
    8. Shu-Yun Ma, 2010. "Shareholding System Reform in China," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13243.
    9. Thrainn Eggertsson, 2006. "On the survival of imperfect institutions," Revista de Analisis Economico – Economic Analysis Review, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business, vol. 21(2), pages 13-24, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:141-177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.hufs.ac.kr/user/hufsenglish/re_1.jsp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.