Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research Methodology in Comparative Public Administration: Significance, Applications, Trends, and Challenges

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Comparative Public Administration

  • 646 Accesses

Abstract

Comparative Public Administration (CPA) is a stimulating and significant subfield of public administration, because it helps people to understand similarities and differences between countries via comparative perspective about administrative concepts, systems, history, culture, governance, public policy, and bureaucracy. Therefore, this chapter evaluates the following topics for CPA research: the significance of comparative research, trends, and possible approaches (e.g., systems theory, process tracing), contextuality (e.g., social & political contexts, and integral operating system), use of methodology (e.g., quantitative/qualitative/mixed methods, levels and units of analysis, data collection and analysis), and methodological problems and challenges (e.g., case selection, construct equivalence, causality, value bias, and the availability of data). Scientific study of CPA, like all sciences, requires finding answers for big questions of the field by using the most appropriate approach and methodology to be able to overcome possible challenges that might negatively influence objectivity or confirmability, reliability or consistency, validity or truthfulness, and generalizability or transferability of the research.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aberback, J. D., & Rockman, B. A. (1988). Problems of cross-national comparison. In D. C. Rowat (Ed.), Public administration in developed democracies: A comparative study (pp. 419–440). Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. A. (1988). The return to the state. American Political Science Review, 82(3), 853–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. A., & Coleman, J. S. (Eds.). (1960). The politics of the developing areas. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashworth, R. E., McDermott, A. M., & Currie, G. (2019). Theorizing from qualitative research in public administration: Plurality through a combination of rigor and richness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(2), 318–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayhan, E., & Önder, M. (2017). Yeni Kamu Hizmeti Yaklaşımı: Yönetişime Açılan Bir Kapı [New public service: A door to governance]. Gazi İktisat ve Işletme Dergisi [Gazi Journal of Economics & Business], 3(2), 19–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayhan, E., & Önder, M. (2020). Türkiye’deki Siyaset Bilimi ve Kamu Yönetimi Makalelerinin Bibliyometrik Analizi [Bibliometric analysis of the political science and public administration articles in Turkey]. Euroasia Congress on Scientific Researches and Recent Trends-VII, Baku, Azerbaijan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzelay, M. (2007). Learning from second-hand experience: Methodology for extrapolation-oriented case research. Governance, 20(3), 521–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battaglio, R. P., & Hall, J. L. (2018). Trinity is still my name: Renewed appreciation for triangulation and methodological diversity in public administration. Public Administration Review, 78(6), 825–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg-Schlosser, D. (2012). Mixed methods in comparative politics: Principles and applications. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Biesenbender, S., & Héritier A. (2014). Mixed-methods designs in comparative public policy research: The dismantling of pension policies. In I. Engeli & C. R. Allison (Eds.), Comparative policy studies. Research Methods Series (pp. 237–264). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blatter, J., & Haverland, M. (2014). Case studies and (causal-) process tracing. In I. Engeli & C. R. Allison (Eds.), Comparative policy studies. Research Methods Series (pp. 59–83). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caramani, D. (2009). Introduction to the comparative method with Boolean algebra. Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, J. L. (1994). On the concept of universal knowledge in organizational science: Implications for cross-national research. Management Science, 40(1), 162–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D. (1993). The comparative method. In A. W. Finifter (Ed.), Political science: The state of discipline II. American Political Science Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D., Mahoney, J., & Seawright, J. (2004). Claiming too much: Warnings about selection bias. In D. Collier & H. E. Brady (Eds.), Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards. Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, A. (2013). Comparative public policy. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Farah, A. M., Önder, M., & Ayhan, E. (2018). How foreign aids affect developing countries: The case of Ethiopia. Avrasya Etüdleri, 53(1), 7–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fesler, J. W. (1988). The state and its study. PS: Political Science & Politics, 21(4), 891–901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, J., Goggin, M., Heikkila, T., Klingner, D., Machado, J., & Martell, C. (2011). A new look at comparative public administration: Trends in research and an agenda for the future. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 821–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredland, R. A. (2000). Technology transfer to the public sector in developing states: Three phases. Journal of Technology Transfer, 25(3), 265–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerra, M., Gomes, A., & Filho, A. (2013). Case study in public administration: A critical review of Brazilian scientific production. RAC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulrajani, N., & Moloney, K. (2012). Globalizing public administration: Today’s research and tomorrow’s agenda. Public Administration Review, 72(1), 78–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, P. (1990). Foundations of public administration: A comparative approach. Elite Printing Company Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heady, F. (1990). Introduction. In O. P. Dwivedi and K. M. Henderson (Eds.), Public administration in world perspective. Iowa State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heady, F. (2001). Public administration: A comparative perspective (6th ed.). CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heady, F. (2006). Comparison in the study of public administration. In E. Otenyo & N. Lind (Eds.), Comparative public administration: The essential readings (pp. 61–128). Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hendren, K., Luo, Q. E., & Pandey, S. K. (2018). The state of mixed methods research in public administration and public policy. Public Administration Review, 78(6), 904–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 10, 42–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G., Hofstede G. J., & Mincov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). Geert Hofstede BV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honig, D. (2019). Case study design and analysis as a complementary empirical strategy to econometric analysis in the study of public agencies: Deploying mutually supportive mixed methods. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(2), 299–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibietan, J., & Folarin, S. (2013). Conceptual and methodological approaches to comparative public administration. International Journal of Innovative Social Sciences & Humanities Research, 1(2), 49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M. N., Bingöl, Y., & Nyadera, I. N. (2020). Political and administrative culture in Turkey’s AK Party, Tunisian An-Nahada, and Bangladesh Jamat-e Islam. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy and governance. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_4028-1

  • Islam, M. N., Bingöl, Y., Nyadera, I. N., & Dagba, G. (2021). Toward Islam through political parties, ideology, and democracy: A discourse analysis on Turkey’s AK Party, Tunisian Ennahda, and Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami. Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, 25(1), 26–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/09735984211019797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M. N., Önder, M., & Nyadera, I. N. (2020). Islam, politics, and Bangladesh: A qualitative content analysis on the democratic and political culture of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (BJI). ADAM AKADEMİ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 291–318. https://doi.org/10.31679/adamakademi.783781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jepperson, R. L., & Meyer, J. W. (1991). The public order and the construction of formal organizations. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 204–231). The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jilke, S., Meuleman, B., & Van de Walle, S. (2015). We Need to Compare, but How? Measurement Equivalence in Comparative Public Administration. Public Administration Review, 75(1), 36–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, T., Patrick, K., Ik Cho, Y., & Shavitt, S. (2005). The relation between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(2), 264–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, L. R., & Klingner, D. E. (2007). The consummate comparative public administrationist: A tribute to Ferrel Heady, 1916–2006. Public Administration Review, 67(2), 188–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jreisat, J. (1975). Synthesis and relevance in comparative public administration. Public Administration Review, 35(6), 663–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jreisat, J. E. (2011). Globalism and comparative public administration. CRC Taylor & Francis Group.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jreisat, J. E. (2005). Comparative public administration is back in, prudently. Public Administration Review, 65(2), 231–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, S. S. (2013). Context matters: Pedagogy and comparative public administration. Croatian & Comparative Public. Administration, 13(1), 161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Köylü, M., & Önder, M. (2017). Karmaşıklık Kuramı ve Kamu Yönetiminde Uygu-lanması: Yalova Kent İçi Ulaşım Hizmetlerinin Dijital Modelleme ve Simüla-syonu [Complexity theory and application in public administration: Digital modeling and simulation of Yalova City transportation services]. SDÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(Kayfor15 Özel Sayısı), 1707–1726.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlmann, S., & Wollmann, H. (2014). Introduction to comparative public administration: Administrative systems and reforms in europe. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landman, T. (2008). Issues and methods in comparative politics. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. The American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, C. (2012). Environmental decision-making in context: A toolbox. CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Brudney, J. L. (2002). Applied statistics for public administration. Harcourt Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mele, V., & Belardinelli, P. (2019). Mixed methods in public administration research: Selecting, sequencing, and connecting. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(2), 334–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, M., van de Bunt, G. G., & de Bruijn, J. (2006). Comparative research persistent problems and promising solutions. International Sociology, 21(5), 619–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morçöl, G. (2005). A new systems thinking: Implications of the sciences of complexity for public policy and administration. Public Administration Quarterly, 29(3), 297–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, K., & Van Deth, J. W. (2010). Foundations of comparative politics: Democracies of the modern world. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyadera, I. N., & Islam, M. N. (2020). Link between administration, politics and bureaucracy. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy and governance. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3903-1

  • Önder, M. (2011a). A preliminary cross national test of competing theories of nonprofits: Does culture matter? International Review of Public Administration, 16(1), 71–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Önder, M. (2011b). Prime minister turnover and distributive policy making: An interrupted time series analysis. Journal of US-China Public Administration, 8(3), 298–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Önder, M. (2012). Third sector research (R. Taylor, Ed.). New York: Springer, 2010. Book Review: International Review of Public Administration, 17(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Önder, M. (2013). Understanding kids/teens’ construction of police and crime concepts as a community policing approach: Social grounded theory applied. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 35(1), 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Önder, M., & Brower, R. S. (2013). Public administration theory, research, and teaching: How does Turkish public administration differ? Journal of Public Affairs and Education, 19(1), 117–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Önder, M., Gündoğdu, P., & Ayhan, E. (2019). Türk Kamu Yönetimi Araştırmalarında Metodoloji Kullanımı [The use of methodology in Turkish public administration studies]. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 33(46), 105–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Önder, M., & Nyadera, I. N. (2020). Comparative administrative cultures between developed and developing countries. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy and governance. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3903-1

  • Önder, M., & Nyadera, I. N. (2022). The trends in public administration and policy scholarship in the new millennium. International Journal of Public Administration (forthcoming, in print).

    Google Scholar 

  • Otenyo, E., & Lind, N. (2006). Comparative public administration: The essential readings. JAI Press Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, L. J., Jr., & Meier, K. J. (2015). Public management, context, and performance. In quest of a more general theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palombara, J. (2006). An overview of bureaucracy and political development. In E. Otenyo & N. Lind (Eds.), comparative public administration: The essential readings (pp. 193–221). JAI Press Publications.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pennings, P., Keman, H., & Kleinnijenhuis, J. (2006). Doing research in political science. Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (1994). Theory and methodology in the study of comparative public administration. In R. Baker (Ed.), Comparative public management: Putting US public policy and implementation in context (pp. 67–91). Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (1996). Theory and methodology. In H. Bekke, J. Perry, & T. Toonen (Eds.), Civil service systems in comparative perspective (pp. 13–41). Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (1998). Comparative politics theory and methods. Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. (2010). Riggs on comparative public administration: Looking back half a century. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 76(4), 761–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. (2011). Not odious but onerous: Comparative public administration. Public Administration, 89(1), 114–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The logic of comparative social inquiry. Florida: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (1997). Turning the tables: How case-oriented methods challenge variable-oriented methods. Comparative Social Research, 16, 27–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (2014). The comparative method moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Lavena, C. F. (2014). Representative bureaucracy in policing: Does it increase perceived legitimacy? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(3), 537–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, F. W. (1962). Trends in the comparative study of public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 28(1), 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, F. W. (1998). Public administration in America: Why our uniqueness is exceptional and important. Public Administration Review, 58(1), 22–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, F. W. (2010). Trends in the comparative study of public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 76(4), 750–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. (1984). Understanding big government. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, A., O’Toole, L. J., & Meier, K. J. (2017). The future role of context: The international research agenda. In Comparative public management: Why national, environmental, and organizational context matters (pp. 195–211). Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanina, A., Balashov, A., & Kaysarova, V. (2016). Public administration research in contemporary Russia: An analysis of journal publications, 2010–2014. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(12), 1036–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, G. (1994). Compare why and how: Comparing, miscomparing and the comparative method. In M. Dogan & A. Kazangicil (Eds.), Comparing nations: Concepts, strategies, substance. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafritz, J. M., Russell, E. W., & Borick, C. P. (2017). Introducing public administration (9th ed.). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigelman, L. (1976). In search of comparative administration. Public Administration Review, 36(6), 621–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigelman, L. (2006). In search of comparative administration. In E. E. Otenyo & N. S. Lind (Eds.), Comparative public administration: The essential readings (pp. 9–16). JAI Press Publications.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, B., & Singh, B. (1964). Case method in public administration. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 25(2), 16–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, T. (1979). States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Heijden, J. (2014). Selecting cases and inferential types in comparative public policy research. In I. Engeli & C. Rothmayr (Eds.), Comparative policy studies (pp. 35–56). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Wart, M., & Cayer, N. J. (1990). Comparative public administration: Defunct, dispersed, or redefined? Public Administration Review, 50(2), 238–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldo, D. (1955). The study of public administration. Doubleday and Company Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walle, S. V., & Brans, M. (2018). Where comparative public administration and comparative policy studies meet. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 20(1), 101–113.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Bogazici University, İstanbul, Turkey

    Murat Önder

  2. Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey

    Emrah Ayhan

Authors
  1. Murat Önder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emrah Ayhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emrah Ayhan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Boğaziçi/Bosphorus University, İstanbul, Turkey

    Murat Önder

  2. Faculty of Social Sciences, Egerton University, Njoro, Macao

    Israel Nyaburi Nyadera

  3. Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey

    Md. Nazmul Islam

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Önder, M., Ayhan, E. (2022). Research Methodology in Comparative Public Administration: Significance, Applications, Trends, and Challenges. In: Önder, M., Nyadera, I.N., Islam, M.N. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Comparative Public Administration. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1208-5_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1208-5_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-19-1207-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-19-1208-5

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation