Historical Approaches to Comparative Politics: A Post-pandemic Research Strategy

The Covid-19 pandemic has limited access to many of the essential tools of social science: in-person interviews, ethnographic fieldwork, surveys, and experiments. In the wake of these challenges, historical research has also suffered as archives and libraries closed across the world. However, the pandemic also led to an expansion in the digitization of archival materials and other historical texts, lowering barriers to accessing these resources. As human subjects research continues to present logistical and ethical challenges, scholars may turn to historical resources and methods to study key questions in comparative politics. The papers and roundtable in this mini-conference use applied and theoretical approaches to show how archival materials—and history more generally—can inform our understanding of current political phenomena. Much of this research was conducted during the pandemic.

The first panel examines the historical foundations of inequality in the Global South. Singh analyzes how colonial-era ideologies of governance have shaped the long-term compliance capacity of the state, particularly around the implementation of developmental interventions. Callis examines why some economic elites support democracy and other redistributive policies in Latin America, finding that elites’ historical ties to authoritarian regimes play a central role. Sarbahi and Koren examine the effects of colonial-era land tenure systems on the relationship between water scarcity and lineage-based violence, especially violence against marginalized castes and indigenous communities. Finally, Carter examines how norms of discriminatory taxation shaped the historical provision of education in indigenous communities in Latin America.

The second panel investigates historical legacies and mechanisms of persistence arising from colonial and pre-colonial experiences. The papers in this panel are united by a common focus on robust concept formation and measurement. A paper by Carter and Urteaga introduces the concept of “politicized state-building” in which state authority was expanded by targeting non-aligned rural municipalities in mid-twentieth century Peru. Wilfahrt’s paper focuses on the conceptualization and measurement of precolonial states and links this discussion to a broader study of antecedent causes. A paper by Mundim investigates how precolonial and colonial legacies influenced the trajectory of indigenous identity and mobilization in Latin America. Finally, a paper by Smith focuses on the mechanisms of long-run identity persistence in the American South.

The third panel seeks to understand state-building in Western Europe and China. Petroff and Mangini examine how military technology propelled cities to consolidate and centralize political authority in Western Europe. Contrary to the experiences of Western Europe, China had the world’s earliest centralized bureaucracy. The remaining papers trace the development of state institutions in China. Yang examines the relationship between external warfare, hydraulic public goods, and economic conditions and state capacity from the 3rd century BC until the early 20th century. Peng examines how Chinese emperors strategically appointed officials based on the propensity of conflict and the skill sets of officials in the Qing dynasty (1644-1722). Zhou and Sui examine personnel flow patterns among key party and government offices at provincial, prefecture, and county levels in Jiangsu Province. Chen, Wang, and Zhang study how bureaucratic legacies from ancient Chinese empires enabled alien rulers to re-establish central control over localities in the late 5th century CE by compensating local powerholders.

The fourth panel focuses on the range of governance strategies adopted by colonial and occupying powers in contested territories and the short- and long-term effects of such approaches. The work on this panel unpacks the concepts of direct and indirect rule. Kim examines how Japan’s wartime occupation of Southeast Asian countries mediated the effects of prior, European colonial encounters. Wenzell Letsa and Wilfahrt test expectations about how colonial indirect rule shaped collective action and efficacy along the Ghana-Togo border. Greenwald asks whether the effects of indirect rule on local governance in the Israeli-occupied West Bank generalize “backward” to other, historical cases. Mukherjee contributes a new analysis of types of indirect colonial rule, examining how each type shapes state capacity and the likelihood of future Maoist insurgency.

The roundtable discussion convenes scholars working on historical political economy to discuss the challenges and opportunities presented by historical approaches to political science. The panel will discuss strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative methods of historical political economy. The panel will also discuss how historical work might be integrated into research examining contemporary causes of political phenomena.