Comparative policy analysis

Conclusion

As editors, we would be remiss to submit that insufficient comparative policy analysis has been done without making explicit suggestions for further research. One critical problem is that the lack of comparable data remains a major hindrance to comparative work. This, in turn leads into the need for a larger inventory of careful cross-national case studies and primary data sources. Although significant advances have been made in data collection and analysis in recent years, these have occurred primarily in areas where quantification is relatively easy, such as economic and demographic statistics.¹

Two related specific avenues for further research are suggested by reflections on the current limits of comparative analysis. First, more conceptual work based in solid methodology is needed if policy studies are to deal with complexities involved in comparative efforts. As part of this, theoretical constructs must be matched with carefully derived data and evidence, both quantitative and qualitative. As Lasswell has noted, the vitality of the comparative method will depend on “whether the expansion of the stock of ‘facts’ accepted as relevant is accompanied by ‘methodological’ changes that render facts indispensable” to the understanding and management of the policy process.² Second, more work should be done to explain and expand upon cultural variables. As this task is addressed in more detail, we should be better able to appreciate the effects of cultural factors on the policy process.

In conclusion, it seems especially appropriate to reassert the value of comparative analysis now, when the policy sciences appear to be at a critical juncture.³ From both domestic and international perspectives, the growing appreciation of crossnational policy research and policy impacts underlines the need for comparative analysis. It is clear that the interest in and importance of policy studies have grown in recent years, but the borders of the constituency remain vague. Efforts to delineate and refine the outlines of the field will almost surely increase. We think that this essay and the ones that follow argue strongly for the inclusion of the comparative dimension.