Varieties of regulatory capitalism: Getting the most out of the comparative method

David Levi-Faur*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

55 Scopus citations

Abstract

The rationale behind this special issue's stepwise analysis of cross-sectoral and cross-national variations and similarities of regulatory reforms is explained. The processes of case selection and inference are clarified and justified. At the same time, the article offers a strategy for an increase in the number of cases without compromising the strength of case-oriented analysis. William Whewell's notion of consilience is employed to (a) justify the inclusion of sectoral as well as national cases; (b) justify different degrees of in-depth analysis according to the inferential role of the case in the research design; and (c) suggest a distinction in the inferential process between comparisons that enhance internal and external validity. The article concludes with a systematic examination of cross-sectoral and cross-national variations in a table that provides a "panoramic snapshot" and "holistic picture" of the combination of variations and commonalities of the cases analyzed.

Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)367-382
Number of pages16
JournalGovernance
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Varieties of regulatory capitalism: Getting the most out of the comparative method'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this