| Review of: | Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences edited by James Mahoney, Dietrich Rueschemeyer |
|---|---|
| Reviewed By: | Hans Peter Olsen |
| Reviewed in: | Political Studies Review |
| Date accepted online: | 11/01/2005 |
| Published in print: | Volume 2, Issue 3, Pages 334-457 |
Comparative
This book sets out to assess the development of empirical, analytical and methodological research within the field of comparative historical analysis. Divided into twelve chapters written by leading North American researchers, it gives an account of how to apply historical comparisons to sociological and political studies.
The contributors argue that comparative historical analysis differs from interpretist studies on the one hand and grand theory accounts on the other by entailing systematic causal analysis and contextualised comparisons over time. Comparative historical analysis is conceived as a field within the broader realms of historical sociology and historical institutionalism. Within this framework, they advocate theoretical and methodological pluralism when historical comparisons are made, as it is compellingly formulated in Theda Skocpol's concluding chapter. The relevance of historical analysis is marked in a chapter by Paul Pierson, who argues that the variables in political science are often best considered as evolving over longer time periods.
The book is rich on material, up to date and well edited. Together the contributions give a coherent picture of comparative historical analysis and set a future research agenda for the field. Although it is missing contributions from economists, the exemplary insights brought forward in the book should be relevant to all researchers in the social sciences who are working with longitudinal studies. The strength of the book is its coherent compilation of a research discipline and its formulation of future perspectives for the field of historical comparative analysis.