Suchergebnisse

AbstractAfter twenty‐five years, few scholars still dispute the leading role of Liberal Intergovernmentalism (LI) in theorizing EU history. Yet some question whether it can explain Europe's recent evolution. This article argues that LI retains its place as a 'baseline' integration theory. It is uniquely able to provide credible micro‐foundations of EU decision‐making, which even theories ostensibly critical of LI borrow. It offers a richer set of innovative opportunities for forward‐looking extension than is often thought. Compared to competitors such as Post‐Functionalism and Historical Institutionalism, LI generates more consistently satisfying empirical accounts of recent EU policy‐making, particularly with regard to the outcomes that ultimately matter most, namely substantive policies. And it remains a trustworthy guide to normative evaluation, for example on the issue of democratic legitimacy. The future of integration theory lies in creatively elaborating LI and, where possible, crafting more rigorous syntheses with alternative accounts.

Qualitative political science, the use of textual evidence to reconstruct causal mechanisms across a limited number of cases, is currently undergoing a methodological revolution. Many qualitative scholars-whether they use traditional case-study analysis, analytic narrative, structured focused comparison, counterfactual analysis, process tracing, ethnographic and participant-observation, or other methods-now believe that the richness, rigor, and transparency of qualitative research ought to be fundamentally improved. Adapted from the source document.

Qualitative political science, the use of textual evidence to reconstruct causal mechanisms across a limited number of cases, is currently undergoing a methodological revolution. Many qualitative scholars—whether they use traditional case-study analysis, analytic narrative, structured focused comparison, counterfactual analysis, process tracing, ethnographic and participant-observation, or other methods—now believe that the richness, rigor, and transparency of qualitative research ought to be fundamentally improved.