UNIT III

COMPARATIVE POLITICS
CHAPTER 9
Approaches to the Study of Comparative Politics:
Traditional and Modern

WHAT IS POLITICS? is empirical; and empirical method is

scientific.

I N ancient Greece the unit of

administration was ‘City-State’; and
it was known as ‘Polis’. The word
COMPARATIVE POLITICS
politics/political science emerged out of Comparative Politics is an important
this meaning of the state (Polis). Thus, component of contemporary Political
Politics/Political science is the study of, Science. It helps in the study of political
or knowledge of, the state (Polis). This issues in a scientific and systematic
nomenclature has since continued, manner. The scope and approaches to
although now we are living in much the study of comparative politics are
bigger states having wide territorial getting widened day by day because
boundaries and large population. of the new development in the
In a wider sense Politics, Political international arena.
Science, Political Theory and Political Comparative politics is mostly
Philosophy—all conceived with the concerned with a comparative analysis
knowledge and study of the state—are of political institutions, political
used in synonymous terms. However, if processes, ideological foundations,
we see minutely we will find some fine norms and societal frameworks of
distinction between these terms. Politics different political systems. There is a
may be used in a general sense. Whereas distinction between comparative politics
Political Theory is a set of generalisations and comparative governments.
on issues concerning state. Political Comparative government refers to the
philosophy denotes reflections on those deliberations on studies of different forms
issues on the basis of ethics and of state systems, their institutional
metaphysics. Again, whereas political framework and functions, and their
philosophy deals with what ought to be constitutional background and
regarding matters relating to the state, formulations. On the other hand,
political science deals with what is comparative politics is more concerned
regarding those matters. Political science with non-state institutions, political
60 POLITICAL SCIENCE : KEY CONCEPTS AND THEORIES

processes and behaviour, societal of structural functional and input-

structures, norms and values. Thus, the output approaches.
scope and framework of comparative
politics is wide and comprehensive in TRADITIONAL APPROACHES
nature.
Aristotle is acknowledged as the (a) Philosophical Approach or
father of Comparative Politics. He was Philosophical-Ethical Approach
more concerned with an historical This is the oldest approach to the study
examination of legal institutions of states. of politics. The philosophical approach
But, in his studies on governments, not is normative in character. Here the study
much attention was given to the analysis of state, government and the people is
of informal institutions of the political inextricably linked with the pursuit of
systems such as tribes, communities, certain goals, morals, truths or high
norms and behaviours of social groups principles. Plato, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel,
and interest agencies, and belief patterns Leo Strauss, et al. pursue this approach.
of the ruling elites. The philosophical approach is
criticised for being too abstract; it takes
APPROACHES: ITS MEANING us far away from the world of reality and
is impracticable. However, it can be
In simple terms an approach may be appreciated on the basis that
defined as a way of looking at and then protagonists of this approach put before
explaining a particular phenomenon. us certain ‘goals’, which might be
The perspective may be broad enough unattainable; but in trying to reach
to cover a vast area like politics of an those goals our present standards would
entire country or it may be very small definitely improve, even though we may
involving just an aspect of local, regional, not reach the ‘goal’.
national and international politics.
There are many approaches to the (b) Historical Approach
study of politics; and sometimes different
approaches overlap each other. However, The historical approach became popular
in a broad sense these can be classified in the last quarter of the 19th century.
under two heads: Traditional and It is based on the idea that in order to
Modern. Traditional approaches are have proper understanding of political
speculative and prescriptive in nature. institutions and processes, it is
In contrast modern approaches are necessary to have a clear understanding
empirical and scientific. of the historical background of those
In short, traditional approaches institutions. Its merit is that it seeks to
include: (1) Philosophical, (2) Historical, understand the state and its institutions
(3) Legal, (4) Institutional. in their process of change. But in its
Modern approaches include: (1) search of theories and general trends, it
Behavioural approach, (2) Systems misses the central role of individuals
approaches with its offshoot in the form and institutions in the process,
APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF COMPARATVE POLITICS: TRADITIONAL AND MODERN 61

and knowledge remains static and (d) Institutional approach or

tradition bound. Institutional - structural
However, the significance of the approaches
historical approach cannot be denied.
The experts who advocate this approach
It has its importance in studying the
want the scope of comparative politics to
relevance of the origin and growth of
be confined to the constitutional
political institutions. G.H.Sabine,
provisions of the formal institutions such
McIlwain, A.J.Carlyle, Catlin, Dunning as legislature, executive and judiciary. It
and others follow this approach. also emphasises on the comparative
Historical approaches thus, becomes analysis of political institutions.
useful in understanding the views of The institutional approach was very
great thinkers from Plato and Aristotle popular during the first quarter of the
in ancient times to Lasswell, Rawls, twentieth century. The protagonists of
Nozick and others in the present times. this approach were Walter Bagehot,
James Bryce, Giovanni Sartori et al.
(c) Legal approach or Legal- This approach is criticised for being
juridical approach too narrow. It ignores the role of
In this approach the study of politics is individuals who constitute and operate
linked with the study of legal and juridical the formal and informal structures of a
aspects of the state. Here the theme of law political system. It also does not analyse
and justice is not treated merely as a informal organisations of political
matter of jurisprudence. Political systems such as pressure groups, nor
theorists belonging to this category look does it give any importance to the social
at the state as a maintainer of an effective context in which institutions function.
and equitable system of law and order. It is also argued that the institutional
Thus, this approach treats the state approach was strongly culture bound,
primarily as an organisation for the as it was mainly an analysis of
creation and enforcement of law. institutions of Europe and America.
Jean Bodin and Hobbes who However, this approach has come to
propounded the theory of sovereignty have an importance of its own in an
may be said to be the early supporters of indirect way. It is assimilated into the
this approach; because for both the Behavioural approach about which you
thinkers the sovereign is the highest law- are going to study now. Moreover, this
maker and his command is law. The approach is still important in the sense
that it draws our attention to the role of
works of Bentham, Austin and A.V.Dicey
may also come within this category. formal rules and institutions.
This approach may be criticised on MODERN APPROACHES
the ground that law embraces only one
aspect of people’s life and, as such, it (a) Behavioural approach
cannot cover the entire behaviour of a You have learnt above about four types
political man. of traditional approaches. All those are
62 POLITICAL SCIENCE : KEY CONCEPTS AND THEORIES

normative approaches, and are value- 2. They advocate a new method. They
laden. Critics feel that value-laden insist upon survey research.
approach becomes too idealistic and 3. Their method is inter-disciplinary.
utopian, and therefore, it becomes It means they largely borrow from
impracticable. Science deals with facts the various disciplines of social and
and not with values. The protagonists of natural sciences.
modern approach, therefore, insist on the The central assumption of the
use of scientific method to explain matters behavioural approach is, to quote
relating to Politics. Scientific approach is Eulan, “the root is man”, Institutions
marked by an empirical investigation of only provide the framework in which
the relevant data. It uses the scientific political actors, (i.e. individuals), play
methodof observation, quantification, their respective roles, and it is this
generalisation and integration. interplay of political actors which
The modern approach finds its best determines the framework.
manifestation in behaviouralism. It The behavioural approach indeed
believes that observing the outward helps to provide us greater insight into
behaviour of political actors and political political process and how ordinarily
institutions, and analysing their behaviour individuals participate in it. But, while
by scientific method can acquire the it helps us to understand public
knowledge of political system. It draws opinion, pressure groups and elections
heavily upon sociological and and quantifies the results of our study,
psychological approaches. A leading it leaves us poorer when it comes to the
German sociologist, Max Weber has study of institutions or processes, which
treated sociology as the basis of politics. cannot be easily quantified. In a sense,
Similarly, those subscribing to both behavioural and institutional
psychological approach try to study and approaches represent two extremes.
explain political institutions and
phenomenon through psychological laws. (b) System analysis approach
The tools of psycho-analysis, they say, can
Input-Output and Structural-
be used to the study of political behaviour.
Functional approach
The behavioural revolution emerged
in the USA in the second quarter of the System’s analysis is one of the major
twentieth century. The main protagonists aspect of behavioural approach.
of behavioural approach are — Charles Behaviouralists study ‘Political system’
Merriam, Heinz Eulav, Robert Dahl, and not the state. System is defined as
Lasswell, David Easton and Almond. the ‘set of elements interacting with each
Some of the main characteristics of other’. A political analyst tries to know,
Behavioural approach are: (1) The function of the political system,
1. They study politics by focussing (2) The structure of the political
attention on the ‘Individual’ system, and
and ‘Group’ behaviour and on (3) Under which conditions the system
political processes. works.
APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF COMPARATVE POLITICS: TRADITIONAL AND MODERN 63

To know the above the system which any political system must perform
analysts use two types of approaches: if it is to survive. It examines the question
(1) Input-Output, and of survival and efficiency of institutions
(2) Structural-Functional in the context of political system as a
whole. The leading exponents of this
Input-Output approach approach are Almond and Powell who
have emphasised that the three
This approach is popularised by David
functions viz. political recruitment,
Easton. In his construction of an input-
political socialisation and political
output framework, Easton was
communication are concerned with the
influenced by the new ‘communications
maintenance of the system. They have
sciences’. Here the idea is that a political
also observed that these functions lead
system has feedback mechanisms, which
to the convertibility of demands
are capable of transmitting information
into policy making and policy
of a positive or a negative kind. Through
implementation. According to them,
feedback two types of input go to the
demands should be converted into
political system ‘demand’ and ‘support’.
authoritative decisions and policies.
If there are too many demands that go to
The functional approach is an
the system and the government is unable
important attempt to broaden the
to cope with them, the system breaks
conceptual base of comparative politics.
down. But, if the people support its rules,
It provides a culture free approach to
the system survives and becomes stable.
comparative politics as it seeks to
Easton’s analysis of the working of the
understand politics in terms of factors,
political system is dynamic, whereas
which provide stability and efficiency.
Almond’s analysis is static.
However, it has been criticised to be too
conservative an approach. It is argued
The Structural-Functional approach that it ignores the fact of conflict and
It is a response to the failure of change in political life, specially in the
the institutional approach. The context of the developing countries. In
Institutional approach studies these countries, because of the
comparative politics in terms of study of prevalence of perpetual poverty, people
institutions such as legislature, executive are consequently interested in the
and judiciary. Its assumptions are that process of change rather than stability.
these institutions are more or less stable This can hardly be accommodated in the
with fixed boundaries. This analysis, it is functionalist framework.
argued, is not adequate in explaining
situations, which are constantly in a (c) Marxist approach
process of change, especially in the world It will not be out of place here for you to
of developing countries. Since know about the Marxist approach,
institutional arrangements in these which is basically different from both
countries are fluid, the important issue traditional and modern approaches.
is to identify certain political functions Marxism provides a powerful historical
64 POLITICAL SCIENCE : KEY CONCEPTS AND THEORIES

framework to examine political systems observed that sometimes there is a sort

and processes in terms of class conflict. of overlapping between the two. For
Marx uses the methods of dialectical example, there are traces of empiricism
materialism and historical materialism in Aristotle’s philosophy in the ancient
to justify his thesis that there are only times. Similarly, there are traces of
two classes in a society —those who own relative-values in the scheme of David
the means of production (the rich) and Easton in modern times. It follows that
those who depend on the labour power several studies to the study of politics are
of their body to survive (the poor). The inter-related in some respects.
relations between these two classes are In certain quarters, the study of
that of conflict; and through this conflict political institutions and functions is
(dialectics) history progresses until it being supplemented by policy analysis
reaches the stage of classless and in which the emphasis is on the
stateless society. (You will learn more substantive issues of polity. However,
about Marxism in one of the last every approach has its respective
chapters of this book). adherents. Today, a political scientist
Marxist approach is different from the draws upon them in an effective manner.
‘behavioural’ approach. Whereas He tends to explain institutions and
behavioural approach defends the processes, collective decisions and power
present system (western) as good and relationships, as a part of wider social
seeks to defend the status quo, the context having a history of their own. In
Marxist approach rejects the present fact, the area of comparative politics has
system (western) as unjust and desires become so widespread, that it covers all
to change it. aspects of a political system, both
Summing up our study of traditional formal and informal, quantitative as well
and modern approaches, it may be as qualitative.

EXERCISES

1. What do you understand by Comparative Politics?

2. Explain any two Traditional Approaches to the study of Comparative
Governments.
3. Describe Modern Approaches to the study of Comparative Politics.
4. Write short notes on:
(i) Philosophical Approach;
(ii) Behavioural Approach;
(iii) Marxist Approach.