1. ESRC/NCRM Training Seminar Cross-National Research Challenge, Cooperation and Compromise 1.Scientific and pragmatic rationales for choice of countries, cases and contexts EU Projects on Family and Welfare Linda Hantrais

2. 2 Challenge, cooperation, compromise Challenges of cross-national comparisons:  Methodological complexity  Crossing national, cultural and linguistic boundaries  Pragmatism and compromise  Cost in time, effort and money  Impact of methods and means on findings Cross-national, cultural or societal?  Understanding of concepts and contexts  Rationales for choice of countries  Combining methods

3. 3 EU policy reviews DG Research policy reviews (FP4, 5):  education, training, employment, quality of work, social inclusion, inequality, social protection, citizenship and identity, migration, regional policy, governance, enlargement, sustainability, F&W  linkages between research and policy  value for money  complementarity, critical mass, synergy  policy solutions  observation of research process, policy interface

4. 4 Setting and achieving objectives How not to design a research programme  No consultation at the research design stage  Thematic coverage not a priority  Country coverage not determined by themes  Policy relevance not built into the research design  Post hoc justification for country mix, methods and policy relevance

5. 5 From the theory of country selection… Number  breadth vs depth:  Breadth  generalisation, limited variables,  Description, juxtaposition  Problems of comparability due to data inconsistencies  Depth  fine-grain analysis  subnational / regional variation

6. 6 From the theory of country selection… Mix  J.S. Mills’ method of agreement (most similar for dependent variable) difference (most different) concomitant variation (association between variables)  Not a recipe for establishing causality  Problem of isolating independent variables  Different results from different combinations of cases

7. 7 Nation as the unit of analysis International organisations:  EU as policy-making framework for nations  Eurostat as statistical agency  Defined but shifting territorial boundaries  Recognised legal and administrative systems  Not necessarily common cultural, linguistic and ethnic identity  Changing membership of international bodies  Multilevel systems of governance  Common reference point + diversity  Material for cross-national analysis

8. 8 …the practice of country selection Political rationale:  geographical coverage  North, south, east + France, Germany, UK ?Representativeness and wider applicability Scientific rationale:  exploring diversity ?Capturing and analysing diversity

9. 9 …the practice of country selection Pragmatic rationale:  partners with cultural/linguistic affinity ?Dealing with bias F&W rationales:  Common research methods  Self-selection  Common mission  Cultural proximity

10. 10 IPROSEC country rationale 1. EEC founder member states > France, Germany, Italy (continental welfare systems) 2. EC second wave member states > Ireland, UK (universal, residual welfare systems) 3. EC third wave member states > Greece, Spain (southern European welfare systems) 4. EU fourth wave member states > Sweden (Nordic, social democratic welfare systems) 5. EU fifth wave member states > Estonia, Hungary, Poland (post-communist welfare systems)

11. 11 IPROSEC research design Aims and objectives:  Compare and contrast the policy process  Inform policy  Assess policy responses and outcomes Methods:  Secondary data analysis  Policy context analysis  In-depth interviews with policy actors and family members  Intraregional heterogeneity

12. 12 Implications of country mix Policy reviews:  Validation through triangulation  Overlap/duplication  Patchy country coverage  Limited reliability and applicability  Concordant/discordant outcomes  Need to revisit assumptions  Awareness of diversity and complexity  Analysis of policy effects  Understanding what works and why in different policy contexts