Methodology in Action –

I have used some of what I have learned about methodology in an essay I wrote for another module. Methodology part begins at 3.

The State of the Study of China: Towards a Better Understanding of Chinas Rise and Strategic Intentions.

The rise of China is set to be the most important aspect of international relations over the coming decades. ‘The Tragedy of Great Power Politics’ (2001) warned us that US foreign policy in relation to China was both ‘misguided’ and ‘doomed to failure.’ In no uncertain terms John Mearsheimer implored that the US ‘reverse course and do what it can to slow the rise of China.’ (Mearsheimer, 2001, p.401-402)

In the first part of this essay I will attempt to briefly describe how neo realism and offensive realism engineers China into being a threat to the US. I will explain that according to neo realism China has little choice but to develop into a regional hegemon. In the second part I suggest this may have had an adverse methodological effect on how China is studied by the west. Finally, I document some solutions to this problem and warn that while it may not be true that China is ‘unlikely to assume defence commitments beyond its immediate periphery’ (Dobbins, 2012 p.9) claims that China are acting or will act offensively need to be grounded on fair and unbiased social science led research.

1. How neo realism forces China to rise

A study of neo-realism says that it ‘posits that the anarchic structure of the international system conditions inter-state relations and that conflict is an enduring possibility’ (Glenn, 2003, p.5). This allows Mearsheimer to predict that Chinas rise will not be peaceful because states ‘seek to survive under anarchy by maximising their power relative to other states, in order to maintain the means of self-defence… they sometimes see aggression as the best way to accumulate more power at the expense of rivals.’ (Mearsheimer, 1990, p.15)

Thanks to Mearsheimer and others, neo realism is of course an enduring idea that seems to explain so much from the past (Mearsheimer, 1990) and helps us form coherent and feasible models for the future (Mearsheimer, 2001).

The past can of course be verified by empirical record. The future, according to the theory, can be predicted as states cannot help but seek to maximise relative power over other states and become regional hegemons in the anarchical international system (Mearsheimer, 2001, p.33-36). No matter how much we abhor this, it is a predefined course of events.

It means one can agree that the world abides by neo-realist rules and at the same time, and until a world government holds sway, wish that it did not. This is what is meant by the works title. It is a tragedy. Going by this explanation China has the reputation it has thanks, in part, to the structural, unalterable conditions we exist in. This must in some ways create and foster a feeling of inevitability amongst believers in the theory and could lead to a culture of failing to properly produce evidence supporting or refuting the proposition.

2. How neo realism can restrict our understanding of Chinas rise.

Despite this structural course that proponents of neo-realism and in particular Mearsheimer’s offensive realism suggest, it is perhaps unfair to hastily tarnish Chinas defence strategy with the offensive neo-realism brush. Recent studies can show China to be following the course Mearsheimer sets out, in looking to create a regional hegemon. This can be seen in studies of conventional strategy China is engaged in such as in the recent appraisal of Chinese military ability by Steven Blank. Blank documents recent Chinese military strategy that is supposedly designed to compete with US defence interests in the region and appears to conform to the events neo realism predicts (Blank, 2013 p.245). The issue these and other studies of China have is that given our thorough knowledge of neo realism as an international relations theory that says certain events are structural and unstoppable, the identification of evidence that seems to genuinely and independently support it is very important.

We have a situation where theory, and perhaps stereotypes, are informing data and evidence rather than the other way round. For instance, Blanks’ work on the Chinese military does not fully explore the United States’ control over the major energy silk roads in the straits of Aden and Malacca and the extent to which this affects the arms deal that recently saw China purchase $2Billion of Aircraft and submarines from Russia (Blank, 2013 p.248). It also fails to recognise that 75% of Chinese oil will need to be imported by 2020 (Jacques, 2009 p.325). This should be taken into consideration as perhaps the variable affecting Chinese military spending in this way is the issue over protecting a supply of energy not the development of a Navy that could rival the local US Naval presence and develop its hegemony. Blanks work is therefore incomplete and hastily concludes that Chinas behaviour is threatening rather than defensive.

3. Solutions

The problem of influenced research on China has been covered by Yung Wei in a series of points raised in his article ‘Social Science and the Methodology of Contemporary China Studies: A Critical Evaluation’ (1985). It was designed to warn us that theories can be self-fulfilling prophesies and that we should conduct sound social science research to combat, and help guard against it.

He outlines three main issues which influence research into China. These would then suggest we look again at how we know what we know about China and we may be at risk of being misinformed.

Firstly, Wei said there is a tendency by western scholars to take a purely ‘sinological approach’ to the study of the China and these arrive at purely descriptive accounts of Chinese history and culture. (Wei, 1985 p.3). This allows policy makers and lay readers to interpret from this what they want. While this kind of research is helpful and particularly in Chinas case absolutely fascinating, Wei argues that for us to understand China better and to understand the broad discipline of social sciences at its universal level of analysis, future academics should employ social science methodology to the study of China and the Chinese and not continue to be purely descriptive (Wei, 1985 p.10). This would mean Blanks’ disclosure of Sino-Russian military hardware deals should come with deeper social science led exploration as to the reason why.

Studying China in this way then presents some methodology problems and asks fundamental questions such as what is the meaning of China? Do we mean Communist China or Taiwan and China? (Wei, 1985 p.6) It is a question that can be asked of the study of Chinese defence strategy such as when Michael Pillsbury questions the analysis of the PLA and US Armed Forces by comparative means. (Pillsbury, 2001 p.1). The means of study need to be first tested and then set.

Secondly, Wei believes that the misrepresentation of China through research can be due to the wanton and the deliberate distortion of reality. While Wei rightly questions the academic integrity of those guilty of the latter, Wei does cite the factor of McCarthyism in the study of China for US academics in the 1950’s and perhaps the distortion of reality at this time can be excused by the very real threat of imprisonment, blacklisting and personal and professional ruin. (Wei, 1985 p.7). These are hardly accusations that can be levelled at western researchers. There are no repercussions so great that could excuse deliberate and premeditated distortion of evidence today.

Thirdly, and importantly for those questioning whether Mearsheimer’s predictions are having too greater influence on the results of research on Chinas defence spending and military intentions, is what Wei calls ‘orientation’ and while not intentionally distortive, it can be just as damaging. Orientation is the conditions in which the research is being conducted and under what circumstances. While McCarthyism may have made academics intentionally doctor results and conclusions or omit certain information on China. The very real fear and threat of nuclear war throughout the 1950’s and the thought of China developing its own may have subconsciously influenced work produced at the time. This idea is not unique to the threat of nuclear war. Having understood the repercussions of neo-realism and Mearsheimer’s prediction of Chinas offensive rise, a researchers ‘orientation’ maybe biased to such a degree that their findings are formed by the theory instead of the findings supporting the theory.

However, orientation can take different forms. In Kumar Singhs analysis of Chinas defence modernisation from 1949-2005 as part of the ‘Four Modernisations’ he laments the non-western accounting style and lack of breakdown on research and development spending and PLA Navy spending (Kumar Singh, 2005 p.690). This is a legitimate concern where the orientation of a western scholar to want comprehensible and transparent data from which to conduct research is integral to understanding China. It leaves gaps in our knowledge that means attempts to fill it (Luff and Erickson, 2013 p.815) risk the danger of being subconsciously led by neo realist predictions.

In conclusion, Mearsheimer’s offensive realism has an ironic twist. It can structurally predispose researchers to producing evidence in support of it. Only a move to using vigorous and probably quantitative findings can we be sure that evidence in support of neo realism is trustworthy and not affected by the pitfalls of weak research.

References

Blank, Steven (2013) ‘Russo-China Military Relations’ The Journal of the National Committee on American Foreign Policy 35:5 pp 755-785

Dobbins, James (2012) ’War With China’ Survival: Global Politics and Strategy 54:4 pp 7-24

Glenn John (2004) Neorealism Versus Strategic Culture. Ashgate: Aldershot.

Jacques, Martin (2009) ‘When China Rules the World’ Penguin Books: London

Kumar Singh, Bhartendu (2005) ‘The Political Economy of Chinas Defence Modernisation. Strategic Analysis, 29:4 pp 680-706

Luff, Adam and Erikson, Andrew (2013) ’Demystifying Chinas Defence Spending’ The China Quarterly 21:6 pp 815-830

Mearsheimer, John J (1990) Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War’ International security Vol. 15(1)

Mearsheimer, John J (2001) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W W. Norton & Company: London.

Pillsbury, Michael (2001) Chinas Military Strategy Toward The U.S. A View from Open Sources

Wei, Yung (1985) ‘Social Science and the Methodology of Contemporary China Studies: A Critical Evaluation’ found at http://www.yungwei.url.tw/file/C20.pdf [Accessed 28/03/2014]

Hazard For Those Who Underestimate the Belgians

With Joachim Low announcing a squad so young German paper rounds will be lacking in lads to goose step the ‘Berliner’ round the streets of a morning, it is a remote possibility that Man Utd may have got the wrong guy in Louis this summer and should have asked Low about his after WC intentions.

Low in my opinion will either step down or be asked to leave at the end of this year’s World Cup and any club wanting a manager to develop players over the next 5 years will do much worse than the ex Klinsmann protégé. Low is also the solution to the problem Chelsea have in not developing their own players and would furthermore make a popular and suitable replacement for Wenger when they loose the FA cup to Hull and calls for Arsens head re-emerge. With both Mouriniho and Wenger unlikely to budge this summer Low will see Tottenham as beneath him and probably look to manage in a Champions league team elsewhere in Europe.

German success should and will be measured by an appearance in the semi finals or final and it is under these circs that Low would voluntarily step aside, however should we see Germany fall at the group of 16 for example he would not have the privilege. So, what outsiders are there this year?

My top tip for the semis is Belgium who also have a shout at having the golden boot winner in their squad. With Mingolet or Courtis in goal, Vertongen, Kompany, Hazard, Felani, Mirelles, Benteke if fit (poss Januzai) and Lukaku in the group they should beat any African team just because of the latters unorganized nature and indiscipline. In fact Belgium’s team is so good bookies have given odds as short as 14/1 on them lifting it. Lack of first hand knowledge of tournament football together should see this doesn’t happen but a semi final place is on the cards. In fact, with a lucky draw as Turkey and Sweden have had in recent tournaments a semi final spot is a distinct poss and if any one player scores 4 or 5 goals he could be a golden boot winner going on previous records (the past two World Cups have seen 5 goals win it) It is not beyond the realms of possibility for Hazard to score two vs Algeria and perhaps another two against Russia and South Korea is it? Hazard also takes the pens for his national side one bookie has Hazard at 100/1 to win the golden boot!

So, think on. Belgium sound a silly punt for winners but with there progress fairly nailed on considering the group and then in knockout competition even average teams can have a easyish ride through. With 5 or 6 goals likely to take the golden boot trophy maybe you should all think again.

Jennifer Mason ‘Mixing Methods in Quantitatively Driven Way’ (2006)

Jennifer Mason wrote ‘Mixing Methods in Quantitatively Driven Way’ in 2006. Although I will not be tackling quantitative methods in my dissertation because it is not appropriate and there is plenty of quantitative research being carried out in the US Naval War College and SIPRI about Chinese defence spending etc… However, it is not a methodological justification to do so unless you have researched quantitative methods and the benefits of doing so. There is also the option of using some quantitative methods when researching amongst others, this is mixed methodology or ‘multi-dimensional research strategy’ This ‘integrating of method’s is compatible with the idea that multidisciplinary approach to social sciences is the best way to answer questions. (See Tu Yao)
Starting from the point of mixing methods as being the best way not to ‘impoverish’ results by being one dimensional and uses relatively new research as a starting point (1998) Mason talks of the difficulty in measuring certain things such as visits to her mother of hours spent with her. If you read the hypothetical life she imagines her and her mother having you will understand that time spend measured in minutes and seconds is irrelevant. There are lots of emotions that are not captured by quantitative methodology.
‘’Social science research methods need to match up to this complexity of multidimensional experience’’ page 12
Mason agrees with Flyvbergs thoughts on there being no hierarchy on choosing a method when she says ‘’I fully endorse the view that research strategies should be driven by the research questions we seek to answer and part of this must involve choosing methods that are appropriate to the questions being addressed.’’ She also agrees that one research question should be tackled by all methods available ‘’It is also so that researchers are aware that their way of conceptualizing the issues is one among potential others’’ He mixed method idea or ‘’palette of methods’’ means research questions may now have dozens of combos of research methods in order to cover all bases. She thinks the only driver should be how best to answer the question or add something new to the questions answers that already exist.
Mason talks extensively about the macro/micro divide about social science research. She states that the experience she has with visiting her mother has the macro considerations of transport issues, money and time to spend on visiting her mother etc… however there is the micro considerations of the emotional side of their mother daughter relationship. Researchers, according to Mason, tend to pick one side and research that with either quantitative or qualitative methods respectively. We then can end up with either how and why questions are answered or not measurements or vice versa.
Mason contradicts herself I think when she says ‘’ In my view, qualitative research has the explanatory edge precisely because it is concerned with explanation’’ however, it depends on the questions being asked surely? It maybe if the RQ asked ‘how much?’ explanation is the last thing that’s needed.
With the two strengths of qualitative research (context and holistic comparison) Mason thinks we should mix methods and treat context factors as variables that can change she says
‘’My argument is that, if we are going to improve our capacity to explain and to ask and answer rigorous and useful questions in our complex social environment, we need to understand how contexts relate to social life, and factor this understanding into our explanations.’’
Mason does identify issues with this. How can contrasting and differing regional or life experience factors be used to imply social facts? Mason thinks ‘’ we would do well, up against this challenge, to be interested in and to draw upon different theoretically informed approaches to conceptualizing context, rather than insisting upon the primacy of only one world view’’
Masons conclusion reminds us that recognising the validity of more than one approach is important in studies as well as being flexible in the methodological approach we take.

A summary of ‘Scope Statements: Imperatives for Evaluating Theory by Walker and Cohen in American Sociological Review, 50:3

Given the fact I am scoping in my dissertation I have looked at why this is useful in more depth. I initially found it to be a good way of making my project feasible and a way of narrowing down my literature review.
W and C begin by saying ‘the debate [in social sciences] can be characterized by two extreme and seemingly irreconcilable positions. Those who believe that it is possible to develop general theories of social behavior and argue for the cumulative development of general theoretical explanations are at one extreme. At the other extreme are those who suggest that it is not possible to construct truly general theories of social behavior’ Page 288. This can make anything you do pointless, yet scoping can help with this.
They ‘offer a strategy for constructing and testing theoretical formulations that avoids the true-false paradox. The strategy we propose requires investigators to develop and test conditional theories. Webargue that falsifying theories which have been made conditional through explicit specificationbof their scope can be a progressive rather than degenerative process’ page 289 Ergo, theories that are conditional are more useful.

We should therefore narrow down our research question and then test it.

‘scope statements provide clear guidelines for choosing the appropriate empirical situation in which to evaluate a theory’
‘’Theorists who make the scope of theoretical statements explicit are making a commitment to a class of situations in which the general principles will not be falsified’’
PAGE 294
By appending more general,i.e., more inclusive, less restrictive, scope statements to a theory, the sociological investigator makes the theory more vulnerable to falsification. PAGE 295
‘The proper use of scope restrictions provides a method of analyzing data without getting tangled up in all possible relationships among variables that are not central theoretical concerns.’ PAGE 297
In walker and Cohens conclusion they say that to resolve the true-false paradox conditional research questions should be asked.

They demonstrate that theoretical formulations that have been made conditional by specifying their scope are different than theories that have been made conditional by adding new theoretical variables to them to make them work.
Finally, scoping forces researchers to make a commitment to count a theory as false if it encounters negative evidence under the given conditions we therefore must commit to accepting the results after we scope.

 

A summary of Chapter One – Paradigms and Sand Castles : Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics by Barbara Geddes (2003)

Paradigms and Sand Castles : Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics (2003)

Geddes begins by giving us reasons to be doing what we are doing as political scientists. Her own reason is that being ‘’Confronted by compelling and exiting events in the world scholars quickly turn their attention to trying to understand them’’. Page 12 To Geddes, the aim is to understand the world around her and sound methodological ground helps us do this. Geddes, who as further reading of this book will show, likes a metaphor and likens politics to paths in a jungle. Some of which do not take us where we want to go.

Geddes clearly and helpfully defines paradigms in this book. She calls them ‘a dominant understanding of a particular phenomenon at a particular time’ page 17

There is a thought that quantitative data is of higher evidential value but to counter this Geddes refers to analysis that inferred far greater claims than the data could support and therefore quantitative answers are very vulnerable to bias and subjectivity. For Geddes this can therefore be no different than anecdotal evidence if done badly. Page 24

One reason Geddes thinks paradigms fail is because a broad review of the evidence was not conducted in the first place. This means I will need to do a thorough literature review to formulate the theory and come down on a side of the hypothesis. I need to be spanning as much evidence as possible other wise the paradigm may fail or at least be suspect.
When using the data collected some analysis while not ‘ignoring’ evidence, use it selectively to support of refute theories. I cannot do this as it leads to the eventual failure of the paradigm one day although Geddes says this could be decades later.
This ‘general inattention’ (Geddes employs a careful and kind quote here) just leads to a slowing down of formulating a true working theory and our understanding she highlighted at the beginning. Page 29

Geddes also takes time to persuade us that our explanations need to be whitled down to the bear minimum and not be complex and difficult to understand. Any simplification is not necessarily a good one. Some thing to remember perhaps when writing up a conclusion. Page 33

A summary of ‘Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research’ by Bent Flyvbjerg

Flyvberg’s article from 2006 is an investigation into five misunderstandings often perceived when looking at case studies as a method of research. He argues that if people merely opperate at a theoretical level they remain at the beginners level of looking at the world they live in. He goes on to say ‘case knowledge is central to human learning’ Researchers who wish to develop there own skills need to use context depoendent examples in their work. Page 222-223.

Flyvberg then makes the admission  that any social science is incapable of producing undeniable theory that is applicable independent of context. Flyvberg uses this idea to heap extra value on context dependent knowledge. This is something  hope to produce in my work as ”case studies are particularly well suited to producing this knowledge…. as learning [in the social sciences] is possible” Page 224. Flyvberg is adamant that case studies and the ”force of example” are underestimated.

There then follows a good table that actually does not do what it says it does. The table claims to help select the case but instead lists the action that particular selection type performs. Take Deviant for example: It explains what it does but not which deviant case to choose. It is useful however and will probably make it into my dissertation.

Flyvberg continues to slam into the idea of firm theoretical truth in social science as he persuades us that complex real life narratives are impossible to fit into neat theories. This is helpful as I therefore feel under less pressure to do so. What is important from this article and Flyvbergs viewpoint is to understand the world a little better than before and explain it in a good narrative. Page 237

”the dense case study is more useful for the practitioner and more interesting for social theorythan either factual “findings” or the high-level generalizations of theory” PAGE 238

Flyvberg finishes by reminding us that we need to tell our cases story in as broader philosophical  terms as possible as it will then appeal to many different readers. This could mean merely using the basic theoretical positions and not being too cleaver or narrow minded.

Applied Research Methods

I will be giving a presentation on Chinese International Security. This meant I was looking at a single case study as a research design and followed some advice from Stoker and Marsh and George and Alexander. This was my first effort of knowingly applying a research method to my work. Its not much and will be fully explained in the presentation but click the link to see how to use ideas from literature on research design to say why you have done what you have done.

Chinese International Security Presentation – Selected Slides: Applied Research Methodology

A summary of ‘Americas coming War with China’ (2005) by Ted Galen Carpenter.

Americas coming War with China (2005) by Ted Galen Carpenter. Palgrave Publishing

This summary is intended for those looking at International Security, China, US foreign policy and history. Carpenter begins with a future imaginary war between the US and China over Taiwan. The picture he paints is vivid and seemingly generated by a love of narrative and fiction. It is not until the subsequent chapters and Carpenters conclusion that we see that the imaginary war is in fact a result of his research and is more of a prophesy.

The future war begins with Taiwan’s independence rhetoric delivered through its media and the call by the president to change the state’s official name from Republic of China. The PRC then ramp up the action to reclaim Taiwan and cause the US to send aircraft carriers into the strait between the two states. China begins to take offence and after years of developing its own military to deal with the issue of Taiwan bombs the US naval presence. After airstrikes by USAF on the Chinese mainland the issue of Nuclear weapons raises its head and the war calms down to the point where Taiwan become part of China again, the US is humiliated militarily and economically after Chinese shedding of US bonds. Pages 1-25

At this point it may be right to scoff but after careful reading of the ensuing chapters Carpenter presents a good case for this being a decent stab at what might happen. Carpenter begins by laying the blame in the hands of the Chinese and colonial expansion in general. In 1895 A war between China and Japan over Korea resulted in Taiwan been given to Japan after Chinese defeat. Taiwan (already showing an independent streak) declared independence and made it a Japanese police state. Despite the occupation or may be because of it Taiwan developed a new culture and became a very different place to mainland China in 1943.

This became todays problem when Churchill and Roosevelt divvied up ex Japanese land and gave Taiwan to the Chinese after a Cairo conference. Here lyeth the problem. The US created their own problem. The ‘rough landing’ Page 34 China made on Taiwan upset locals and felt the hard work of developing a strong economy and industry was undone. Further local upset was caused by the nationalists using Taiwan as a base during the war with Mao in 1949.

Previous to the Cairo treaty Churchill and the US president decides on Mao had stated that he did not consider Taiwan ‘lost territory’ Page 37 But the two western leaders legitimised Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan in Cairo. This confuses things today.

During the Korean War in the 50’s Truman sent Aircraft carriers to the area and there was thinking that the US should use Nuclear weapons on mainland China to make the nationalists on Taiwan more able to reclaim what the communists had taken. In fact Eisenhower asked why ‘’Nuclear weapons shouldn’t be used exactly as you would a bullet’’ Page 43

In the 60’s JFK changed stance to recognise PRC as official China. This was however just a way of stoking up Chinese anti USSR feelings. This was clever by the US and Kissinger as the US strategy was to use Chinese war theorist Sun Tze’s philosophy and engage in war by causing friction with your enemies alliances.

In 1979 the US agreed to sell arms to Taiwan and including high tech fighter aircraft in 1981. Concomitantly, Chinese-US relations also improved due to Deng Xiapings modernisation and the need for China to import to develop.

Taiwan replied by democratising the country in order to win over US congressional support. Whatever the impact Bush Snr sold 150 top of the range jets to Taiwan in 1992. This could have been due to the fact Bush Snr was fighting an election and need the votes a big defence contract would bring. (he lost anyway) This gave Taiwan the confidence to court relationships with other nations which incensed China. 150,000 troops moved to Fujian province just over the water and after renewed US naval presence a further arms deal was signed including Attack Submarines. Page 71

Today the US want to trade with China and support democracy in Taiwan. A tricky situation. Any strategic ambiguity was cleared up by Bush Jrn in 2001 when he said ‘’we will defend Taiwan’’ Page 127.

All changed after 9/11 when China was needed by the US to reign in North Korea and assist with pressuring Pakistan and Central Asia to cooperate with dealing with terrorism.

In 2004 however the rise of China turned the tables. China now had the ability to take Taiwan. Reports and Think Tanks saw that 700+ Ballistic missiles were trained on Taiwanese economic hubs. The issue remained that Taiwan had decent air defence and only 20% of shoreline useful for amphibious assault. Page 153

The tipping point would be the introduction of a blockade that would result in Chinese submarine being hunted by depth charges. This would lead to an open naval warfare that would see China now superior Navy win out.

All this may seem as hypothetical as the initial chapter but is borne out by reliable intelligence and research. This was all thought through in 2005 and then said it would take 10 years for China to develop the amphibious hardware to invade or more of the same naval power to win any naval warfare brought about by a blockade.

The book, although depressing does show the kind of way China has been strategically moving to ensure a successful war over Taiwan and warns the west over interfering in sovereignty issues. It encourages us to find a peaceful end to the ‘one china’ dispute and perhaps the west should explain to Taiwan it would need to defend itself in the future and stay out of this affair. It seems inevitable that Taiwan will return to mainland control and other states in the area should not antagonise China into a war it cannot win (I.e Japan and the Diayou Islands)

A summary of Theories and Methods in Political Science edited by David Marsh and Gerry Stoker (1995) Macmillan: Basingstoke.

As part of continued efforts in understanding research methods and not only choosing the correct one for any dissertation but understanding how to do said method well I have looked at:

Theories and Methods in Political Science edited by David Marsh (1995) Macmillan: Basingstoke.

This book helpfully breaks down the sections into methods and includes a good quotable introduction. It reminds us that ‘’in the study of political science it is important to be aware of the methodological choices available’’ page 13-14 because certain methods may be useful in certain research questions. The way of selecting seems rather unscientific when Stoker suggests certain topics have ‘gut’ preferences for certain methodological approaches page 14. It leads me to believe that in order to answer any research question it needs to be tacked from every research method and I am one part of this process.

For me it has identified the umbrella term inductive method ‘’The inductive method [which] draws its conclusions by empirical observation and the search for patterns and generalisations.’’ This is what comparative analysis comes under.

Due to the fact that ‘’The comparative method involves the PRESENTATION of empirical evidence of some kind in an attempt to compare systematically and explicitly political phenomenon.’’ Page 173 I need to present evidence for both cases from the same variable (provided you do two cases)

I am going to be reviewing two terrorist groups which is sanctioned under Marsh et al opinions of good comparative analysis as ‘logically, the comparative method can be employed in intra country comparisons’’ so logically, elements from within the state such as terrorist groups can be compared to other similar groups in other states. Page 173

Although there is not hierarchical line of methodology, some are needed to be done first, data and evidence cannot be used to test a concept unless the theory is first developed properly. Page 175 With this in mind my dissertation will need to clarify some conceptual ideas first such as what is security. This means I will have to use some conceptual methodology (only a little bit) to set my concepts.

There are 3 different types of comparative anayisis 1) case studies of individual states within a framework 2) comparing a limited number of states 3) global comparison of statistics.

INDIVIDUAL case studies have been accused of not being comparative method but may have comparative merit!! Page 177. Marsh calls this ‘pedatitic’ but I agree. A single case study can be put together with another with similar variables that it looks at and conclusions drawn to create an analysis. This is what comparative merit means. It is not an insult just highlighting how it can be used in the future. Something every researcher would want. It could be used as part of a edited book into cases of terrorist groups or whatever.

I will be looking into two cases. Selecting the amount of cases have implications in relation to the detail you can do. If you are aiming for generalizability then more is better than less. It is a trade off. Page 189

Stoker warns us that globalisation has implications for comparative case study analysis. But this can be a benefit as my aim is to provide relevant recommendations to defence companies/MOD and defence and security related think tanks such as Jane’s on how to deal with a globalising and dynamic terror group.

This means ‘’we must study the way in which individual states (in my case terrorist groups) contribute to the processes of globalisation’’ i.e what effects do these groups have on the West page 189 and that ‘’Globalisation means researchers need to broaden their concerns in order to understand more the common global problems that all countries face.’’ This is inevitable anyway as ‘’Gone are the days when political scientists could insulate the study of politics from the broader social and economic processes’’ All page 186.

Factors and Issues in British Parliamentary Candidate Selection

David Denver. Britain: centralised parties with decentralised selection in Candidate Selection in Comparative Perspective. Michael Gallacher and Michael march eds. (1988) Sage Publications: London

Denvers chapter appears in a 1988 comparative analysis where the level of analysis is the state. Within each state the main political parties are assessed in further comparative analysis where the unit level is party. This is an example of Scoping to find an appropriate way of discussing the selection of candidates in different countries and we can then draw conclusions from each state and from all states at the end.

Denver begins by saying selection of candidates in Britain as in most democracies is a private process internal to the parties. Denver observes that although party administration is highly centralised and process of candidate selection is centrally determined the act itself is decentralised. Denver says all selections are taken by very small groups of people. (Page 47)

Denver’s research shows that between 1955 and 1970 three quarters of seats in Britain never changed hands are were ‘safe seats’ Selections therefore are where ‘the person chosen is in most cases assured of election’ (page 48)

Denver questions democracy as he reminds us that it follows that ‘it is not the voters but small groups of selectors who determine who shall be MP’s’ (Page 48)

As sitting MP’s are reselected selections processes usually happen in marginal or hopeless seats which make them redundant processes with little chance of amounting to anything (Page 50)

Safe seats attract more candidates and long lists will be longer is constituencies where if selected, parliamentary electoral success is almost a given. The behaviours of the selecting committee is likely to be more serious too. (Page 50)

In 1980 Labour changed its selection procedure so that sitting MP’s would not be automatically reselected and would instead need to go through the selection committee at each general election. This was in response to a rift in the party in relation to selection in the 1970’s

Denver states that in Labour seats, candidates are put forward to party HQ for approval by local bodies which makes his claim that only small groups decide future MP’s suspect as a nominee can be chosen by a unanimous body of hundreds of people at trade union level. (Page 53)

Denver reminds us that central party scrutiny and control over Labour selections is rigid and formal. (Page 54)

Selection for all parties involve ‘interaction between the local and national organisations of the parties’ and that ‘there may be some tension’ between the two. (Page 57)

Denver says local party activists are suspicious of national organisations and guard the rights they have in selection and importantly ‘parliamentary candidates in Britain are selected according to the desires and preferences of local selectors’ (Page 58)

Denver remains convinced that ‘candidate selection in Britain is that it is the prerogative of small, unrepresentative groups’ (Page 58)

Denver says that ‘there is no evidence that the ideological atmosphere generated by Thatcher significantly affected the role of ideology in selections.’ Service to the constituency is more important of Conservative selections. Ideological orientation is however of high importance to Labour selectors. Vague character qualities are shared by all parties the same e.g being presentable, articulate and decent. (Page 62-63)

A clear issue Denver raises is that often selection committees base their decisions on a small bundle of forms and a 20-30 minute interview and given that MPs spend more time with people and at meetings than they do making roaring speeches this seems unhelpful. (Page 63)

In his conclusion Denver says the only real issue central party HQ’s have with local selection is the propensity to select candidates suited to the back rather that front benches (Page 68)