How Careful Thinking about Activities Improves Evidence using Process Tracing

• In Event: Applying Process Tracing in Practice

Abstract

This paper explores how conceptual clarity about causal mechanisms, and in particular the activities that are theorized to bind parts of mechanisms together in a productive relationship, can improve the strength of empirical evidence gathered when studying policy interventions using process tracing. When using variance-based evaluation approaches, strong evidence of a causal relationship gained from an RCT is at the top of the evidential hierarchy. In contrast, when engaging in process tracing, there is per definition no ‘variation’ because we are exploring how a policy process plays out within a particular case. Instead, strong evidence that enables causal inferences to be made is relatively direct evidence of the activities that actually links a part of a policy process with the next part in a productive fashion. Weaker evidence would have the character of circumstantial evidence, for example showing that educational attainment increased during a particular time period, but that would not enable us to demonstrate that the preceding part actually caused this.
Drawing on this distinction, the paper then develops a set of practical guidelines for how the activities associated with parts of policy processes can be theorized in a manner that enables the collection of relatively direct evidence. Using practical examples from the policy evaluation field, the paper explores how activities can be made clearer by attempting to expose the causal logic behind the theoretical links of parts of a process.

Author

• Derek Beach, University of Aarhus