1. Comparative Politics 1 POL1010
Lecture 2
14th October 2004, 3-4pm
Concepts and Definitions in Comparative Government

2. Lecture Plan Defining Comparative Government
The Growth in the Discipline
The Benefits and Pitfalls of Comparing
The Centrality of Concepts, Categories and Constructs
Caveats and Issues to Keep in Mind When Studying CP

3. Defining Government
‘governments are very powerful and are seen to be very powerful, even in the most liberal countries and even where they do not run the economy. They have great financial resources, their decisions have the authority of the law, and the coercion of physical punishment is at their disposal. In countries large or small, the actions of our own government and the actions of the governments of the great powers will shape our destiny’ (Blondel, 1995: 3)

4. Growth in the Comparative Discipline
Early example of CP:
Aristotle’s Politics (350 BC): compared constitutions of Greek city states
Growth in the Discipline Post WW2:
Doubling of Independent states
south-east Asia, Middle East, north Africa and Africa south of the Sahara

5. Trends in the Comparative Discipline
Jean Blondel Comparative Government
Three main phases in the study of CP:
Constitutionalist phase (Aristotle – 1900s)
Behaviouralist phase (1940s-1960s)
Institutionalist phase (1970s-)

6. Benefits and Pitfalls of Comparing
To help us address the counterfactuals – ‘what if…?’
to avoid ethnocentrism
to help us develop theory, hypotheses and concepts
Source: Mackie and Marsh, 1995; Dogan and Pelasy, 1990.

7. Benefits and Pitfalls of Comparing
Description is not Comparison (Macridis, 1955)
The persistence of ‘Cultural Idiosyncrasies’ (Mayer, 1972; Ragin, 1987)

8. The Centrality of Concepts, Categories and Constructs
Comparative Political Framework = concepts associated with ‘Governmental System’
David Easton (1953) – governmental system emphasises the interconnectedness of the elements of government
Comparative Politics = study of the scope of these interconnected elements

9. Elements of the Governmental System
Institutions established via constitutions
Presidencies
Cabinets
Legislatures
Participants in the government process
Political parties
Groups
Bureaucracies
Media

10. Types of Government System
Democracy (various types, see next week’s lecture)
Military (various types)
One-party
Hereditary monarchies
Dictatorships
Supranational

11. Institutions not People?
Individual political actors still matter – they can shape institutions (March and Olsen, 1984)

12. Blondel’s Framework for Comparison
Three questions must be examined:
The general characteristics of the concept of the political system
The nature of the components within the system – i.e. institutions or groups which can be compared across countries
How far these components can be concretely linked – thus helping us to distinguish amongst political systems

13. Easton’s Definition of the Political System
David Easton views the political system as a
framework for the ‘authoritative allocation of
values’ (1953), where decision-making has
three key elements to it:
It is an allocative process
What is being allocated is value
The process is authoritative

14. Centrality of the Individual Elements of Government
Without studying the individual institutions we could not examine what governments actually do and the decisions that they take.

15. Elements of the Governmental System
By looking at these individual elements:
1. many, but not always all, of these elements will exist in political systems
2. systems will differ in the manner in which these elements interconnect with one another

16. The Comparative Method
In order to compare these institutions of
different countries fully we need to have:
Detailed information about the internal organization of these bodies
Know what these institutions and groups actually achieve

17. The Comparative Method
Structural Functionalism
- describe the different elements of the governmental systems
Dependency Approaches
Drawn from Marxist approach
Administrative State
Role of history
Social Cleavages Approach
Culturalist Approach
- some countries are not comparable (Middle East and Western countries)

18. The Comparative Method
Social Cleavages Approach
- groupings which have developed in society
Culturalist Approach
- some countries are not comparable (Middle East and Western countries)

19. Caveats and Issues to Keep in Mind
The unit of analysis is the political system –
notably it is not the state. There are two
main reasons for this:
not all political systems can be classified as states
the concept of the state is not neutral when we are going back to the allocation of values issue.

20. Caveats and Issues to Keep in Mind
Political systems are not static
Intervening variables must be remembered:
Support
Authority
Legitimacy
Coercion
Contemporary Context

21. Bibliography Aristotle (350 BCE) Politics
Blondel, J. (1995) Comparative Government Pearson
Calvert, P. (2002) Comparative Politics Longman
Dogan, M. and Pelasy, D. (eds) (1990) How to Compare Nations:
Strategies in Comparative Politics 2nd edn Chatham, NJ: Chatham
House.
Easton, D. (1953) The Political System New York, NY: Knopf
Hague, R. and Harrop, M. (2004) Comparative Government and
Politics 6th edn Palgrave
Macridis, R.C. (1955) The Study o f Comparative Government New York, NY: Doubleday.
March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (1984) ‘The New Institutionalism’ in American Political Science Review
Marsh, D. and Mackie, T. (1995) ‘The Comparative Method’ in Marsh,
D. and Stoker, G. (eds) Theory and Methods in Political Science
London: MacMillan.
Mayer, L.C. (1972) Comparative Political Inquiry Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
Ragin, C. (1987) The Comparative Method Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.