Skip to main content
Log in

Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method

  • Articles
  • Published:
Studies in Comparative International Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Subnational units of analysis play an increasingly important role in comparative politics. Although many recent studies of topics such as ethnic conflict, economic policy reform, and democratization rely on comparisons across subnational political units, insufficient attention has been devoted to the methodological issues that arise in the comparative analysis of these units. To help fill this gap, this article explores how subnational comparisons can expand and strengthen the methodological repertoire available to social science researchers. First, because a focus on subnational units is an important tool for increasing the number of observations and for making controlled comparisons, it helps mitigate some of the characteristic limitations of a small-N research design. Second, a focus on subnational units strengthens the capacity of comparativists to accurately code cases and thus make valid causal inferences. Finally, subnational comparisons better equip researchers to handle the spatially uneven nature of major processes of political and economic transformation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alt, James E. and Robert C. Lowry. 1994. “Divided Government and Budget Deficits: Evidence from the States.”American Political Science Review 88 (December): 811–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Jeffrey J. 1992.The Territorial Imperative: Pluralism, Corporatism, and Economic Crisis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anselin, Luc. 1988.Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, Robert H. 1997.Open-Economy Politics: The Political Economy of the World Coffee Trade. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, David and Robert Adcock. 1999. “Democracy and Dichotomies: A Pragmatic Approach to Choices about Concepts.”Annual Review of Political Science 2: 537–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, David and Steven Levitsky. 1997. “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research.”World Politics 49 (April): 430–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, David and James E. Mahon, Jr. 1993. “Conceptual ‘Stretching’ Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis.”American Political Science Review 87 (December): 845–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, Ruth Berins and David Collier. 1991.Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Córdoba, José. 1994. “Mexico.” InThe Political Economy of Policy Reform, ed. J. Williamson. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Tella, Torcuato S. 1965. “Populism and Reform in Latin America.” InObstacles to Change in Latin America, ed. C. Véliz. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1968. “The Working Class in Politics.” InLatin America and the Caribbean—A Handbook, ed. C. Véliz. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagles, Munroe. 1995. “Spatial and Contextual Models in Political Research: An Introduction.” InSpatial and Contextual Models in Political Research, ed. M. Eagles. London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Peter. 1995.Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firmin-Sellers, Kathryn. 2000. “Institutions, Context, and Outcomes: Explaining French and British Rule in West Africa.”Comparative Politics 32 (April): 253–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, Robert M. 1993. “Divergent Paths: Labor Politics in Barcelona and Madrid”. InPolitics, Society, and Democracy: The Case of Spain, ed. R. Gunther. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Jonathan. 1993.The Politics of Food in Mexico: State Power and Social Mobilization. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1994. “Latin America's Emerging Local Politics.”Journal of Democracy 5 (April): 105–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1996. “How does Civil Society Thicken? The Political Construction of Social Capital in Rural Mexico.”World Development 24: 1089–1103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaines, Brian J. 1999. “Duverger's Law and the Meaning of Canadian Exceptionalism.”Comparative Political Studies 32 (October): 835–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerschenkron, Alexander. 1962.Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, Edward L. 1997. “The Populist Road to Market Reform: Policy and Electoral Coalitions in Mexico and Argentina.”World Politics 49 (April): 339–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, Edward L. and Ernesto Calvo. 2000. “Federalism and Low-Maintenance Constituencies: Territorial Dimensions of Economic Reform in Argentina”.Studies in Comparative International Development 35, 3 (Fall).

  • Grofman, Bernard. 1995. “New Methods for Valid Ecological Inference.” InSpatial and Contextual Models in Political Research, ed. M. Eagles. London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagopian, Frances. 1996.Traditional Politics and Regime Change in Brazil. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller, Patrick. 2000. “Degrees of Democracy: Some Comparative Lessons from India.”World Politics 52 (July): 484–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrigel, Gary. 1996.Industrial Constructions: The Sources of German Industrial Power. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones Luong, Pauline. 2002.Institutional Change and Political Continuity in Post-Soviet Central Asia. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karl, Terry Lynn. 1997.The Paradox of Plenty: Oil Booms and Petro-States. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, Jonathan N. and Gary King. 1999. “A Statistical Model for Multiparty Electoral Data.”American Political Science Review 93 (March): 15–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenworthy, Eldon. 1973. “The Function of the Little Known Case in Theory Formation, or What Peronism Wasn't.”Comparative Politics 6 (October): 17–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesselman, Mark and Donald Rosenthal. 1974.Local Power and Comparative Politics. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, Gary. 1997.A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994.Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohli, Atul. 1987.The State and Poverty in India: The Politics of Reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1990.Democracy and Discontent: India's Growing Crisis of Governability. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, Marcus J. 1999. “Free Markets and Democratic Consolidation in Chile: The National Politics of Rural Transformation.”Politics and Society 27. 2 (June): 275–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, Arend. 1971. “Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method.”American Political Science Review 65: 682–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1975. “The Comparable-Cases Strategy in Comparative Research.”Comparative Political Studies 8 (July): 158–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linz, Juan J. 1986.Conflicto en Euskadi. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linz, Juan J. and Amando de Miguel. 1966. “Within-Nation Differences and Comparisons: The Eight Spains.” InComparing Nations: The Use of Quantitative Data in Cross-National Research, ed. R. L. Merritt and S. Rokkan. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1950.Agrarian Socialism: The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation in Saskatchewan. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1959. “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy.”American Political Science Review 53 (March): 69–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, Richard M. 1995.Remaking the Italian Economy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, Richard M. and Wade Jacoby. 1997. “The Dilemmas of Diffusion: Social Embeddedness and the Problems of Institutional Change in Eastern Germany.”Politics and Society 25 (March): 34–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowry, Robert C., James E. Alt, and Karen E. Ferree. 1998. “Fiscal Policy Outcomes and Electoral Accountability in American States.”American Political Science Review 92 (December): 759–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migdal, Joel S., Atul Kohli, and Vivienne Shue, eds. 1994.State Power and Social Forces: Domination and Transformation in the Third World. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, William. 1994.Hausaland Divided. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montero, Alfred P. 2000. “Delegative Dilemmas and Horizontal Logics: Subnational Industrial Policy in Brazil and Spain.” Paper presented at the Third Meeting of International Working Group on Subnational Economic Governance in Latin America and Southern Europe. San Juan Puerto Rico, August 26–28.

  • Munck, Gerardo. 1998. “Canons of Research Design in Qualitative Analysis.”Studies in Comparative International Development 33 (Fall): 18–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naroll, Raoul. 1961. “Two Solutions to Galton's Problem.”Philosophy of Science 28 (January): 15–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1966. “Scientific Comparative Politics and International Relations.” InApproaches to Comparative and International Politics, ed. R. Farrell. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, Joan M. 1990. “Introduction: The Politics of Economic Adjustment in Developing Nations.” InEconomic Crisis and Policy Choice: The Politics of Adjustment in the Third World, ed. J. Nelson. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Donnell, Guillermo. 1973.Modernization and Bureaucratic-Authoritarianism: Studies in South American Politics. Berkeley: Institute of International Studies, University of California, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1999.Counterpoints: Selected Essays on Authoritarianism and Democratization. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paige, Jeffrey M. 1997.Conffee and Power: Revolution and the Rise of Democracy in Central America. Cambridge: Harvard Univeristy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. Guy. 1998.Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portes, Alejandro. 1983. “The Informal Sector: Definition, Controversy, and Relation to National Development.”Review 7 (Summer): 151–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, Adam and Henry Teune. 1970.The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, Robert D., with Robert Leonardi and Raffaella Y. Nanetti. 1993.Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remmer, Karen L. and Erik Wibbels. 2000. “The Subnational Politics of Economic Adjustment: Provincial Politics and Fiscal Performance in Argentina.”Comparative Political Studies 33 (May): 419–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Kenneth. 1995. “Neoliberalism and the Transformation of Populism in Latin America: The Peruvian Case.”World Politics 48 (October): 82–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, William S. 1950. “Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Indiviaduals.”American Sociological Review 15 (June): 351–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rokkan, Stein. 1970.Citizens, Elections, Parties: Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Processes of Development. New York: David McKay Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, Jeffrey W. 1997.Decentering the Regime: Ethnicity, Radicalism, and Democracy in Juchitán, Mexico. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rustow, Dankwart A. 1968. “Modernization and Comparative Politics: Prospects in Research and Theory.”Comparative Politics 1 (October): 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, David J. 1998. “Careerism and its Consequences: Federalism, Elections, and Policy-Making in Brazil,” Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Political Science, University of California, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, David J. and Richard, Snyder. 2001. “The Value, of a Vote: Malapportionment in Comparative Perspective.”British Journal of Political Science 31, 4 (October).

  • Sartori, Giovanni. 1970. “Concept Misformation in Comparative Research.”American Political Science Review 64: 1033–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, Giovanni, ed. 1984.Social Science Concepts: A Systematic Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, Richard. 1999a. “After Neoliberalism: The Politics of Reregulation in Mexico.”World Politics 51 (January): 173–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1999b. “After the State Withdraws: Neoliberalism and Subnational Authoritarian Regimes in Mexico.” inSubnational Politics and Democratization in Mexico, ed. W. Cornelius, T. Eisenstadt, and J. Hindley. La Jolla, CA: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies. University of California, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2001.Politics after Neoliberalism: Reregulation in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, Richard and David Samuels. 2001. “Devaluing the Vote in Latin America.”Journal of Democracy 12 (January): 146–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavenhagen, Rodolfo. 1968. “Seven Fallacies About Latin America.” InLatin America: Reform or Revolution? eds. J. Petras and M. Zeitlin. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoner-Weiss, Kathryn. 1997.Local Heroes: The Political Economy of Russian Regional Governance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, Sidney G. 1967.Peasant Communism in Southern Italy. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, Sidney. 1976.From Center to Periphery: Alternative Models of National-Local Policy Impact and an Application to France and Italy. Ithaca, NY: Western Societies Program, Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tendler, Judith. 1997.Good Government in the Tropics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tendler, Judith (with Rodrigo, Serrano). 1999. “The Rise of Social Funds: What are They a Model Of?” Prepared for The MIT/UNDP Decentralization Project, Management Development and Governance Division, United Nations Development Programme, New York.

  • Tilly, Charles. 1964.The Vendée. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varshney, Ashutosh. 2001.Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyland, Kurt. 1996. “Neopopulism and Neoliberalism in Latin America: Unexpected Affinities.”Studies in Comparative International Development 31 (Fall): 3–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyland, Kurt. 1999. “Neoliberal Populism in Latin America and Eastern Europe.”Comparative Politics 31 (July): 379–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Additional information

Richard Snyder is assistant professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He is the author ofPolitics after Neoliberalism (2001). His articles on regime change and the political economy of development have appeared inWorld Politics, Comparative Politics, Journal of Democracy, andBritish Journal of Political Science.

I appreciate helpful comments on this material from Nancy Bermeo, Dexter Boniface, David Collier, John Gerring, Edward Gibson, Robert Kaufman, Juan Linz, James Mahoney, Kelly McMann, Gerardo Munck, Peter Nardulli, David Samuels, Judith Tendler, and two anonymous reviewers. I also benefited greatly from the insightful comments on an earlier draft provided by the participants in the conference on “Regimes and Political Change in Latin America,” held at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in August 1999.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Snyder, R. Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method. St Comp Int Dev 36, 93–110 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02687586

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02687586

Keywords

Navigation