No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Beyond Parochialism and Domestic Preoccupation: The Current State of Comparative Politics in Canada
Presidential Address to the Canadian Political Science Association, Edmonton, June 14, 2012
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2013
Abstract
Abstract. The response of the comparativists to Canadian scholars' call to build Canadian politics into our comparative framework has to be first, that we, the comparativists engage in a broader dialogue about our sub-discipline and move away from our self-imposed parochialism with respect to the scope and objectives of our research, our methods of theory generation and of empirical analysis. Our house is a divided, fragmented house. Having said this, we do have a fertile ground and share a common conducive infrastructure, methodological and thematic, across the two sub-disciplines to start our engagement with the Canadianists.
Résumé. Notre réponse, de nous qui faisons la politique comparée, à cet appel que nous lancent les canadianistes, soit d'incorporer dans notre grille comparative des elements de politique canadienne, doit se consister tout d'abord en ce que nous nous engagions dans un dialogue élargi portant sur notre sous-discipline et à renoncer à cet esprit de clocher en ce qui concerne les objectifs et l'étendu de nos recherches ainsi que les methodes que nous utilisons pour engendrer nos theories et poursuivre nos recherches empiriques. Notre maison est une maison divisée, fragmentée. Ceci dit, nous sommes, toutefois, dotés d'une terre fertile; et que nos deux sous-disciplines se partagent une infrastructure méthodologique et thématique favorise bien le début d'un engagement avec les canadianistes.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 741 - 756
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2012
References
Abu-Laban, Yasmeen and Abu-Laban, Bah. 2007. “Reasonable accommodation in a global village.” Policy Options IRPP: 28–32. http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/sep07/abulaban.pdf (September 14, 2012).Google Scholar
Almond, Gabriel. 1990. “Separate Tables: Schools and Sects in Political Science.” In A Discipline Divided: Schools and Sects in Political Science, Almond, Gabriel. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Banting, Keith and Kymlicka, Will, eds. 2006. Multiculturalism and the Welfare State: Recognition and Redistribution in Contemporary Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beland, Daniel and Lecours, André. 2008. Nationalism and Social Policy: The Politics of Territorial Solidarity Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boychuk, Gerard W. 2008. National Health Insurance in the United States and Canada: Race, Territory and the Roots of Difference. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Gamkhar, Shama and Vickers, Jill, eds. 2010. Publius, Canadian and US Federalism (special issue) 40 (3).Google Scholar
Hillman, Judith. 2008. The World of Mexican Migrants: The Rock and the Hard Place. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Hübner, Kurt. 2011. “Area Studies Centres in North America.” India-EU Study Centres Programme: Workshop on Area Study Centres, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Laitin, David D. 2000. “Comparative Politics: The State of the Subdiscipline.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Manning, Kimberley. 2012. “Pacific Imaginaries: Rebuilding Chinese Studies in Canada” March 15, 2012 in Research Reports Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. http://www.asiapacific.ca/research-report/pacific-imaginaries-rebuilding-chinese-studies-canada (September 14, 2012).Google Scholar
Munck, Gerardo L. 2010. “Comparative Politics: Taking Stock and Looking Forward.” Working paper series no. 1, Committee on Concepts and Methods (C&M), Research Committee. International Political Science Association. http://www.concepts-methods.org/Files/WorkingPaper/PM_30_Munck.pdf (September 14, 2012).Google Scholar
Munck, Gerardo L. and Snyder, Richard. 2007. “Debating the Direction of Comparative Politics: An Analysis of Leading Journals.” Comparative Political Studies 40 (1): 15–31.Google Scholar
Rudolph, Lloyd. 2005. “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom, Let a Hundred Schools of Thought Contend: Arguments for Pluralism and Against Monopoly in Political Science.” In Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in Political Science, ed. Monroe, Kristen. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Rudolph, Suzanne Hoeber. 2005a. “The Imperialism of Categories: Situating Knowledge in a Globalizing World.” Perspectives on Politics 3 (5): 5–14.Google Scholar
Rudolph, Suzanne Hoeber. 2005b. “Perestroika and its Other.” In Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in Political Science, ed. Monroe, Kristen. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Phillipe. 2006. “The Nature and Future of Comparative Politics.” European University Institute. http://www.eui.eu/Documents/DepartmentsCentres/SPS/Profiles/Schmitter/PCSNatureAndFutureOfComparPo (September 14, 2012).Google Scholar
Simeon, Richard. 1991. “Canadian and American Comparisons”, paper presented at the annual meeting of Canadian Political Science Association, Queens University.Google Scholar
Teichman, Judith. 2012. Social Forces and States: Poverty and Distributional Outcomes in South Korea, Chile, and Mexico. Palo Alto CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
White, Linda, Simeon, Richard, Vipond, Robert and Wallner, Jennifer, eds. 2008. The Comparative Turn in Canadian Political Science. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Wolinetz, Steven. 1991. “Comparative Politics In Canada”, paper presented at the annual meeting of Canadian Political Science Association, Queens University.Google Scholar