THAT'S NOT ALL ON COMPARATIVE METHODOLOGIES: FROM SOCIAL POLICIES TO "THINGS" BY RAMESH MISHRA
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8481-6140
Abstract
This article proposes a critical approach to qualitative comparative methodologies in the study of social policies, based on the analysis of the case study presented by Mishra (1995) in his book ‘The Welfare State in Capitalist Society’. The aim is to answer the research question of this article: how, in qualitative research, do the choices of comparison units facilitate or limit the understanding of social policies? The methodology adopted involves theoretical, documentary, and case study analysis, examining common frames of reference in comparative approaches, such as causality, empirical variations, application limits, theorization, and comparison units. The study shows that the methodological path to understanding different realities is increasingly linked to the formation of comparative units and the definition of the nature of the cases, often classified as successful, unsuccessful, or hybrid experiences. These categories can result from a logical construct defined by the researcher. The conclusion is that one of the most relevant aspects of the research lies in the poor or non-existent grasp of the meanings and explanatory senses that each unit of analysis and comparative cases (political regimes) attribute to their choices in the face of the crises of capitalism. Ramesh Mishra's work reinforces our suspicion: in qualitative research, comparing cases can improve the understanding of social policies and limit their interpretation and explanation. Taking the conscious risk of comparing social policies as national agreements, with a high degree of territorial variation, is a practice that can ignore the specific logic and dynamics of each context. This review therefore emphasises the importance of a critical understanding of methodological choices and theoretical approaches in comparative qualitative studies. As well as recognizing that not everything is comparable and that replication can reinforce the coloniality of knowledge, it stresses the need to pay attention to the ‘hierarchy of credibility’ when analyzing comparative models.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
openAccess
Alber, J. (1988), "Is there a crisis of the welfare state? Cross-national evidence from Europe, North America, and Japan", In European Sociological Review, 4(3), 181-207.
Albuquerque, C. (2016), “O Estado-Providência do século XXI: um estado retraído ou um estado “pan-ótico”?” Em Cristina Albuquerque & Helena Amaro da Luz (coord.), Políticas sociais em tempos de crise: perspetivas, tendências e questões críticas, 3-25, Lisboa, Pactor.
Bachelard, G. (2005), A formação do espírito científico: contribuição para uma Psicanálise do Conhecimento, 5reimp., Rio de Janeiro, Contraponto.
Börzel, T. & Risse, T. (2014), “When Europeanisation meets diffusion: exploring new territory”, In Tanja Börzel and Thomas Risse (eds.), West European Politics: From Europeanisation to Diffusion, 192-207, London, Routledge.
Branco, R. (2022), Proteção social no Portugal democrático: trajetórias de reforma, Lisboa, Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos.
Campenhoudt, L. V.; Marquet, J. & Quivy, R. (2023), Manual de investigação em Ciências Sociais – reformulado, complementado e actualizado, 2ed., Lisboa, Gradiva
Clasen, J. (2007), “Comparative Social Policy and the European Union”, In John Baldock, Nick Manning and Sarah Vickerstaff (eds.), Social Policy, 3ed., 601-626, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Coêlho, D. B. (2016), “Mecanismos Políticos e Institucionais da Difusão de Políticas”, Em Carlos A. Pimenta de Faria, Denilson Bandeira Coêlho e Sidney Jard da Silva (orgs.), Difusão de políticas públicas, 35-64, São Paulo, Editora UFABC.
Collier, P. (2007), The bottom billion: why the poorest countries are failing and what can be done about it, New York, Oxford University Press.
Collier, D. (1993), "The Comparative Method." In Ada W. Finifter (ed.), Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, 105-119, Washington, D.C., American Political Science Association.
Cripps, F. (1981), “The British crisis: can the left win?” In New Left Review, 128. Consulted in https://newleftreview.org/issues/i128/articles/francis-cripps-the-british-crisis-can-the-left-win.
Durkheim, É. (1980), As regras do método sociológico. Lisboa: Editorial Presença.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990), The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism (reprinted 2012), London, Polity Press-Cambridge, UK.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1996), “After the Golden Age? Welfare State dilemmas in a global economy”, In Gøsta Esping-Andersen (ed.), Welfare States in transition: national adaptations in global economies, 1-31, London, SAGE Publication.
Esping-Andersen, G. (2015), “Welfare regimes and social stratification”, In Journal of European Social Policy 25(1), 124-134, https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928714556976.
Fernandes, T., Araújo, C., Santos, I. G. & Romanos, E. (2021), “Ciclos de protesto e democracia: uma comparação entre Portugal e Espanha, 2000-2019”, Em Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas, 97, consultado no 13 dezembro 2021. http://journals.openedition.org/spp/9429.
Ferrera, M., Hemerijck, A. & Rhodes, M. (2000), O futuro da Europa social: repensar o trabalho e a proteção social na nova economia, Oeiras, Celta Editora.
Fischlowitz, E. (1964), Fundamentos da política social, Rio de Janeiro, Livraria Agir Editora.
George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005), Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
Gough, I. (1979), The political economy of the Welfare State, London, Macmillan.
Hobsbawm, E. (2012), A Era do Capital 1848-1875 (reprinted), São Paulo, Editora Paz e Terra.
Jacques, O.; Noël, A. (2018), “The case for welfare state universalism, or the lasting relevance of the paradox of redistribution”, In Journal of European Social Policy, 28(1), 70-85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928717700564.
Keohane, R. O. & Nye, J. S. (1977), Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Kingdon, J. (2014), Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd. ed., Kirby Street-London, Pearson.
Korpi, W. (1980), “Social policy and distributional conflict in capitalist democracies”, In West European Politics, 3 (3), 296-316, https://doi.org/10.1080/01402388008424288.
Kuhlmann, J. (2021), “Mechanisms of policy transfer and policy diffusion”, In Osmany Porto de Oliveira (ed.), Handbook of Policy Transfer, Diffusion and Circulation, 43-57, New Jersey, Frank Fischer - Rutgers University.
Lalioti, V. (2018), “Comparative Social Policy: a historical overview of the field”, In Social Cohesion and Development, 12(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.12681/scad.15944.
Lijphart, A. (1971), "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method." American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682-693.
Löwy, M. (1987), As aventuras de Karl Marx contra o Barão de Münchhausen: marxismo e positivismo na sociologia do conhecimento, 8ed., São Paulo, Editora Cortez.
Mair, P. (2008), “Concepts and concept formation”, In Donatella Della Porta and Michael Keating (eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective, 177-197, London, Cambridge University Press.
Marshall, T. H. (1975), Social Policy in the Twentieth Century, 4ed., London, Hutchinson University Library.
Miller, S. M. (1980), “The eighties and the left: an American view”, In Ralph Miliband and John Saville (eds.), The Socialist Register 1980: a survey of movements & ideas, v.17, London, Merlin Press.
Mishra, R. (1984), The Welfare State in crisis, Brighton, Wheatsheaf Books.
Mishra, R. (1995), O Estado providência na sociedade capitalista, Oeiras, Celta Editora.
Morin, E. (2015), Introdução ao pensamento complexo, 5ed., Porto Alegre, Sulina.
Peters, B. G. & Fontaine, G. (2020), “Introduction to the Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Comparative Policy Analysis”, In B. Guy Peters and Guillaume Fontaine (eds.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Comparative Policy Analysis, 1-18, Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA, USA, Edward Elgar Publishing.
Polanyi, K. (2015), A Grande Transformação, Lisboa, Edições 70.
Ragin, C. C. (1987), The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. California, University of California Press.
Rosanvallon, P. (1984), A crise do Estado Providência, 2ed., Lisboa, Editorial Inquérito.
Rosental, C. & Frémontier-Murphy, C. (2001), Introdução aos métodos quantitativos em Ciências Humanas e Sociais, Lisboa, Instituto Piaget.
Schmitter P. (2008), “The design of social and political research”, In Donatella Della Porta and Michael Keating (eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective, 263-295, London, Cambridge University Press.
Simmons, B. A., Dobbin, F. & Garrett, G. (2006), “Introduction: The international diffusion of liberalism”, In International Organization, 60 (4), 781–810, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1518465.
Simons, H. (2014), “Case Study Research: In-depth understanding in context”, In Patricia Leavy (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research, 455-470, New York, Oxford University Press.
Taylor-Gooby, P. (2004), “New risks and social change”, In Peter Taylor-Gooby (ed.), New risk, new welfare: the transformation of the European Welfare State, 1-28, New York, Oxford University Press.
Walker, A. & Wong, C. (2013), “The Ethnocentric Construction of the Welfare State”, in Patricia Kennett (ed.), A Handbook of Comparative Social Policy, 98-114, Cheltenham, UK and Northhampton, MA, USA, Edward Elgar.
Wälti, S. (2020), "Multi-level environmental governance", In Henrik Enderlein, Sonja Wälti and Michael Zürn (eds.), Handbook on multi-level governance, 411-422, Cheltenham (UK); Northampton (MA), USA, Edward Elgar Publishing.