POLI 11103 COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS: AN INTRODUCTION

2009/10 Teaching Block 2, weeks 13-24

Unit Owner: Dr Andrew Wyatt
Level: C
Credit points: 20
Phone 0117-928-8477
Prerequisites: None
Email a.k.j.wyatt@bris.ac.uk
Office 2.1, 10 Priory Road Monday, 12.10-1.00 and Thursday 12.10-1.00
Lectures: Friday 11.10, location Chemistry LT3
Curriculum area: Comparative Politics
Unit description
Why and how do states form? Why are some states democratic? How can conflict be managed?
What difference does civil society make to political outcomes? Do political institutions matter? All
of these questions can be answered by comparing the experiences of different countries. This unit
introduces students to the comparative study of politics and government. Students will become
familiar with a broad range of theories and concepts used in comparative studies of politics. The
theories and concepts will be applied intensively and comparatively to ten country cases: France,
Germany, Japan, Russia, Brazil, China, India, Mexico, Iran and Nigeria. The unit begins by looking
at some fundamental topics in the study of comparative politics including the purpose of
comparison and leading theoretical approaches to comparative politics. A consideration of the
process of state formation leads into a comparative analysis of transitions to democracy. The next
section of the unit examines the role played by political parties as mediators between social forces
and the formal institutions of government. The unit then examines the impact that formal
institutions of government have on political outcomes. Themes covered in the final section of the
unit include management of the economy, presidential executives, parliamentary systems, federal
and consociational devices used to manage political conflict.
Teaching arrangements
1 lecture and 1 seminar per week.
Requirements for credit points
Satisfactory attendance at seminars
A passing mark for the two essays and the end of unit exam.
Summative assessment
A two hour exam (100%)
Core reading
Mark Kesselman, Joel Krieger & William A. Joseph (eds) (2010), Introduction to
comparative politics: Political challenges and changing agendas, 5th edition, Boston: Houghton
Mifflin. ISBN 0-495-79741-3
Objectives

to introduce students to key theories and concepts used in the study of comparative politics

to introduce students to the key literature on comparative politics

to introduce students to the outline of core political institutions

to develop a critical approach to understanding political institutions

Learning outcomes
By the end of this unit students will:

have read and understood some of the key literature on comparative politics.
have demonstrated familiarity with key ideas used in the literature on comparative politics.


be able to use these ideas to frame explanations of political outcomes.

be able to integrate empirical evidence into conceptually grounded arguments.

be able to compare the political experiences of different countries.

have a working knowledge of key institutions of government and

have a working knowledge of politics in the country cases

have demonstrated an ability to participate in seminar discussions

Transferable skills

Analytical thinking and problem solving

Academic writing

Verbal reasoning
Development and feedback
Feedback will be provided for the essays and the exams on this unit. The essay feedback will help
you develop your writing skills and it will also indicate how you might be better prepared for the
exam.
Details of coursework and deadlines
The written work requirements for this unit are two essays. The first essay is due on or before 12
Noon, Friday, 5 March 2010 (week 18), the second on or before 12 Noon, Friday, 23 April 2010
(week 21). Each essay should be between 1,500 and 2,000 words long.
Although the required and supplementary reading indicated below is grouped in terms of weeks you
should think about what other sources might be relevant to your essay.
To write a good essay ensure that you: a) read widely, b) answer the question, c) explain in the
introduction the context of the question, your basic argument and how the essay will proceed step
by step (the structure), and d) signpost the structure throughout the essay, indicating the logical
progression from paragraph to paragraph and section to section.
TEACHING ARRANGEMENTS
Lectures
There are 11 lectures on this unit. There will be one 50 minute lecture each week, from week 13 to
23. The lectures will take place on Fridays at 11.10 am. An outline summary of each lecture will
be posted on the Blackboard virtual learning environment for the unit.
Seminars
There are 10 seminars on this unit. There will be one 50 minute seminar a week from week 13 to
22. There are no seminars in weeks 23 and 24 to allow time for revision. It is vital that you read
the required reading before participating in the seminar. Seminar tutors will work on the assumption
that students have done the assigned reading in advance of the class and will ask students direct
questions about the reading. Tutors will assign you to a reading group which also be the basis for
small group discussion in the seminar classes.
Contact details for the tutors:
Ana Juncos Garcia
Alvaro Mendez
Hannah Parrott
Andrew Wyatt

<a.e.juncos@bris.ac.uk>
<a.mendez@bris.ac.uk>
<Hannah.Parrott.07@bristol.ac.uk>
<a.k.j.wyatt@bristol.ac.uk>

LEARNING HOW TO LEARN

In the course of this unit students are expected:


To read the core reading before attending seminars

To do some supplementary reading in preparation for the essays and the exams

To become familiar with the country cases by reading the core text

To apply material from the country cases in a thematic way

To reflect on the reading in the light of the seminar discussion questions

To participate actively and demonstrate verbal reasoning skills in seminar discussions

To take careful notes during lectures and synthesise this material with the reading material
and seminar discussions

To work in groups
LEARNING RESOURCES
Required text
You need to purchase a copy of:
Mark Kesselman, Joel Krieger & William A. Joseph (eds) (2010), Introduction to comparative
politics: Political challenges and changing agendas, 5th edition, Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0495-79741-3 [The 4th edition can be used; be aware of different page numbers I will make a list
available]
Optional purchases
The main text concentrates on country cases. The course pack outlines the conceptual material but
the following textbooks cover conceptual material in an accessible way and you might want to buy
one of the following for the purposes of supplementary reading:
J. Bara & M. Pennington (2009), Comparative Politics, London: Sage. This book has very good
chapters relevant to lectures 1, 6, 9 and 10.
R. Hague & M. Harrop, Comparative government and politics: an introduction, various editions are
available second hand.
Course pack
A course pack contains all of the set readings for the seminar discussion not included in the core
text. The pack also includes some supplementary items, which along with the core readings, will be
very useful for essay writing.
Short-loan items
A selection of useful items for essay writing is available on 3-hour short-loan. These items are
designated with the symbol *.
Blackboard Virtual Learning Environment
The Department of Politics encourages the use of this package for all of its units. Course material is
posted on this website. Announcements and email messages will also come through this route. It is
essential that you register to use this learning tool. You may log in and generate a password at <
https://www.ole.bris.ac.uk/>.
Academic Journals
This syllabus includes references to articles in academic journals. You should also browse journals

relevant to this unit. It is also helpful to read reviews of books listed on the reading list in the
academic journals. Journals to browse include:
Journal of Democracy
Comparative Politics
Comparative Political Studies
World Politics
Electoral Studies
Electronic Journals
The University library has a subscription to a large number of journals that are available through the
library website (including most of those named above). It is also easy to find book reviews by
searching online databases that are available when you log in via Athens. Electronic journals can be
found at:
http://www.bris.ac.uk/is/library/electronicjournals/
This page also has a link showing how you can access electronic journals from off-campus
locations.
Please do not use wikipedia. Consult sources directly.
Lecture and seminar schedule
Week Lecture topic Deadlines
Seminar topic
13
Comparisons and the study of Politics (Fri 29 Jan)
Unit introduction
14
State formation (Fri 5 Feb)
Comparisons
15
Civil society (Fri 12 Feb)
State formation
16
Transitions between Democracy and Authoritarianism (Fri 19 Feb)
Civil
society
17
Social and Political divisions (Fri 26 Feb)
Democratic transition
18
Parties (Fri 5 Mar) Essay 1 deadline (Fri 5 Mar) Social and political divisions
19
Party Systems and Electoral Systems (Fri 12 Mar)
Parties
20
States and economic development (Fri 19 Mar)
Party systems
21
Presidential and parliamentary systems (Fri 23 April)
Essay 2 deadline (Fri 24 Apr)
States and Economic Development
22
Managing conflict: federal and consociational devices (Fri 30 Apr)
Presidential and parliamentary systems
23
Revision lecture (Fri 7 May)
No seminar
Seminar schedule
Core reading is given for each weeks seminar. You must read ALL this material. The core seminar
reading provides the basis for discussion. Some of this is taken from the core text (which you are
expected to buy). The rest of the core material is included in the course pack (these are designated
with the symbol ). Although you must complete this reading, you should not, of course, confine
yourself to such material. Supplementary reading is given at the back of this syllabus. A further list
of supplementary reading for the latter half of the unit is provided in the references at the end of
each set of lecture notes. Please note that some of the reading overlaps and informs seminar
discussions for more than one week. This will help you make connections across the subject and
develop an understanding of broad themes in the study of comparative politics.

Week 13: Introduction and assignment of country cases

Seminar tutors will assign students to one of two reading groups. This is to guide students through
the reading schedule for the following country cases: France, Germany, Japan, Russia, Brazil,
China, India, Mexico, Iran, and Nigeria. One objective of the course is for you to learn how to
make use of the country cases and use them as evidence to test the leading theories of comparative
politics. The reading groups will facilitate comparison and small group discussion in classes.
Learning outcome:

Familiarity with the unit structure, teaching methods and required work.
Week 14: Why Compare?
Discussion Questions:
How do comparisons help us extend our understanding of politics? What are the shortcomings of
studying politics on a country by country basis? What do the leading theories of comparative
politics tell us about how politics works? What comments do you have about the selection and
classification of the country cases in the core text?
Core Reading:
M. Kesselman, J. Krieger, & W.A. Joseph (eds) (2010), Introduction to comparative politics:
Political challenges and changing agendas, pp. 4-25
Extracts from M. Lichbach and A. Zuckerman (eds) (2007), Comparative Politics: Rationality,
Culture and Structure, pp.3-8 and 242-249.
Learning Outcomes:

An understanding of the insights gained from comparative study

A knowledge of the theoretical foundations of the sub-discipline of comparative politics

Week 15: State formation
Discussion Questions:
How and why do states form? Do European models provide a useful guide to the process of state
formation elsewhere? What kind of comparison are we making when we compare Germany and
Japan? What do the paired comparisons tell us? Which is more illuminating: comparing Iran with
Germany/Japan or comparing Iran with India/Nigeria?
Core Reading:
C. Tilly (1985) War Making and State Making as Organized Crime, in P.B. Evans, D.
Rueschemeyer & T. Skocpol (eds) Bringing the state back in, pp. 169-191.
B. Moore (1967), Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making
of the Modern World, pp.433-442.
Kesselman et al (2010), pp. 579-597 (Iran)
Group A

Group B

Kesselman et al, pp. 266-278 (India) and 364-377 (Nigeria)

(Germany) and 212-224 (Japan)

Kesselman et al, pp.158-170

Learning Outcomes:

An understanding of general and particular historical legacies following from the process of
state formation.
Week 16: Civil Society
Discussion Questions:
What have been the distinctive contributions of civil society to political development in the two
cases you have read about? What similarities and differences are revealed by comparing the two
cases you have read about? Does the evidence from your country cases confirm or challenge
existing conceptual and theoretical assumptions about civil society?
Core Reading:
Group A
Group B
Kesselman et al, relevant section on Germany (199-203) and Japan (252-8)
relevant sections on India (301-6) and Nigeria (404-6)

Kesselman et al,

R. Putnam (2000), Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community, pp.15-28.
A. Varshney (2002), Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life, pp.3-18
S. Berman (1997), 'Civil Society and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic', World Politics,
49/3 pp. 401-429
Learning Outcome:

A recognition of the ambiguous political character of civil society

Week 17: Transitions between Authoritarianism and Democracy

Discussion Questions:
On the basis of your accumulated reading how would you explain the transitions in the consolidated
democracies of France, Germany and Japan?
Individuals in group A: What do the experiences of Mexico and Russia tell us about the process of
transition?
Individuals in group B: What, if anything, might lead you to expect China to make a transition to
liberal democracy?
Core Reading:
Kesselman et al (2010), pp. 25-31, 100-14 (France), 158-170 (Germany) and 212-224 (Japan)
Group A
Group B
Kesselman et al, pp. 518-530, 553-572 (Russia) and 472-85 (Mexico)
39 and 675-680 (China)

Kesselman et al, pp. 626-

 B. Moore (1967), Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, pp.413-32

G. Therborn (1977), The Rule of Capital and the Rise of Democracy, New Left
Review, 103, pp.3-41
Learning Outcomes:

An awareness of the range of explanations for the development of democratic politics

Week 18: Social and Political Cleavages
Discussion Questions:
How and why do social divisions become politically relevant? In what ways have social divisions
influenced the political development of India and China? How would you explain differences
between the two cases?
Core Reading:
Kesselman et al, pp. 266-284, 296-306 (India) and 660-80 (China)
E.E. Schattschneider (1960), The Semisovereign People: A Realists View of Democracy in
America, pp. 62-77.
A. Varshney (2007) Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict, in Boix and Stokes (eds) Oxford Handbook
of Comparative Politics, pp.274-94.
Learning Outcomes:

An understanding of how social divisions influence political conflict in particular cases

An ability to explain how political entrepreneurs exploit social divisions or use political
cleavages to conceal latent conflict
Week 19: Political Parties
Discussion Questions:
Why do political parties form? What functions do parties perform in the cases of Mexico, Brazil
and France? How are they similar and how do they differ?
Core Reading:
Kesselman et al (2010), pp. 137-142 (France), 450-456 (Brazil) and 499-506 (Mexico)
J. Aldrich (1995), Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America,
pp.18-27.
G. Sartori (1976), Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis, pp.24-9.
E.E. Schattschneider (1960), The Semisovereign People, pp. 62-77. (see reading for previous
week)
P. Webb (2002), Introduction, in P. Webb, D. Farrell, & I. Holliday (eds), Political Parties in
Advanced Industrial Democracies, pp.11-13.

Learning Outcomes:

An understanding of the range of functions political parties might perform

An understanding of the diversity of political parties within and across states

Week 20: Party Systems and Electoral systems
Discussion Questions:
What relationships are said to exist between electoral systems and the party system? What
relationships exist between social divisions and party systems? What do the party systems of
Germany and France have in common? How do they diverge? What do the party systems of India,
Japan and Mexico have in common? How do they diverge?
Core Reading:
Kesselman et al (2010), pp. 137-42 (France), 189-199 (Germany), 248-52 (Japan), 296-301 (India)
and 499-506 (Mexico)
S.M. Lipset & S. Rokkan (eds) Party Systems and Voter Alignments, pp.13-23 and 47-54.
M. Duverger, (1964) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State,
pp.217-26
Learning Outcomes:

An understanding of structural accounts of party system formation

An understanding of institutional approaches to party system maintenance

An ability to explain processes of party system change in particular cases

SUMMER TERM
Week 21: States and Economic Development
Discussion Questions:
How, if at all, have political priorities shaped the economy of the countries you have compared?
How have economic factors influenced political development in the countries you have compared?
What similarities and differences are revealed by your comparisons? Does the evidence from your
country cases confirm or challenge existing conceptual and theoretical assumptions about how
states interact with their economies?
Core Reading:
Group A
Group B
Section 2 of Kesselman et al on: Nigeria and Iran Section 2 of Kesselman et al on:
Brazil and Mexico
R.H. Bates (1981), Markets and states in tropical Africa: the political basis of agricultural policies,
pp.119-128.
P. Evans (1995), Embedded autonomy: states and industrial transformation, pp. 3-13.
A. Kohli (2002), State, Society, and Development in I. Katznelson & H. Milner (eds), Political
Science: the state of the discipline, pp.109-114.

Learning Outcomes:

An understanding of how economic factors impact on political development

A broad understanding of how political factors might determine economic outcomes

Week 22: Presidential and parliamentary systems

Discussion Questions:
What are the perils of presidentialism? What technical flaws are there in the argument presented by
Linz? What other cases might you apply Linzs argument to? What are the strengths and
weaknesses of the system of government detailed in your selected country cases?
Core Reading:
All: Kesselman et al (2010), pp.234-40 (Japan) and 493-496 (Mexico)
Group A
Group B
Kesselman et al, pp. 122-130 (France) and 286-8 (India)
and 440-7 (Brazil)

Kesselman et al, pp. 180-6 (Germany)

All:
J. Linz (1993) The Perils of Presidentialism, in L. Diamond and M. Plattner (eds), The Global
resurgence of democracy, pp.108-26.
S. Mainwaring & M. Shugart (1997) Juan Linz, Presidentialism, and Democracy: A Critical
Appraisal, Comparative Politics, 29/4, pp. 449-71.
Learning Outcomes:

An understanding of the contested relationship between political executives and democratic

stability
The first essay for this unit should be taken from questions 1-4.
The core text, with its data on different country cases, is assumed to be an important source for the
writing of your essays. However to write a good essay you are expected to read beyond this source
and make use of a wider range of sources. You are especially encouraged to use some of the
sources listed below to help you develop the conceptual aspect of your essays. Be wary of online
sources with out an academic provenance. It is better to use work by academic authors which tends
to be carefully researched and has usually been read by at least one referee to check its quality.
There is a good deal of material available in the electronic journals provided by the library and
accessible through the library website. And dont forget the material included in the course pack!
1. What are the advantages of a comparative approach over the study of a single case?
2. Why do states form?
3. By what mechanisms does civil society shape political outcomes?
4. Which theoretical approach to explaining democratic transition do you find most persuasive?
Illustrate your answer with reference to at least two of the country cases.

ESSAY QUESTIONS FOR SECOND ESSAY SUBMISSION

The second essay for this unit should be an answer to one of the two questions given below. Again
some sources are listed below but do also seek out other scholarly material.
5. The party system of the Federal Republic of Germany between 1949 and 2009 was determined
by the social structure of German society. Explain why you would agree or disagree with the
statement.
6. To what extent have the institutions of the French Fifth Republic limited the development and
influence of political parties?
SUPPLEMENTARY AND ESSAY READING
Topic 1: Comparison and the study of Comparative Politics
Sources available online:
D. Collier (1993), The Comparative Method', in A.W. Finifter (ed) (1993), Political Science: The
State of the Discipline II, available at:
<http://www.polisci.berkeley.edu/faculty/bio/permanent/collier,d/articles-n-chapters/APSATheComparativeMethod.pdf>
A. Lijphart (1971) Comparative Politics and the comparative method, American
Political Science Review, 65/3, [Electronic Journal]
C. Ragin & J. Sonnett (2004), Between Complexity and Parsimony: Limited Diversity,
Counterfactual Cases, and Comparative Analysis, COMPASSS Working Papers, WP2004-23,
available at:
<http://www.compasss.org/RaginSonnett2004.PDF>
C. Ragin (2003), 'Making Comparative Analysis Count', COMPASSS Working Papers,
WP 2003-10, available at: < http://www.compasss.org/RaginDayOne.PDF>
T. Skocpol & M. Somers (1980), Approaches to Historical Comparison: The Uses of
Comparative History in Macrosocial Inquiry, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 22/2,
pp.174-97. [Electronic Journal]
R. Snyder (2001) Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method, Studies in Comparative
International Development, 36/1, pp. 93-110. available at:
<http://www.polisci.berkeley.edu/faculty/bio/permanent/Collier,D/graduatearticles/Snyder%202001
.pdf>
Coursepack items:
M. Lichbach and A. Zuckerman (eds) (1997), Comparative Politics: Rationality,
Culture and Structure, pp.1-8.
J. Hopkin (2002) Comparative Methods in D. Marsh and G. Stoker (eds), Theory
and methods in political science, pp.249-67.
B.G. Peters (1998), Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods, pp.28-46, 56-7.
Other sources:
* J. Bara & M. Pennington (2009), Comparative Politics, Ch 2, JF51 COM
P. Burnham, K. Gilland, W. Grant & Z. Layton-Henry (2004), Research Methods in Politics,
JA86 RES
*R. Hague & M. Harrop (2007), Comparative government and politics: an introduction, JF51
HAG

G. King, R.O. Keohane and S. Verba (1994), Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific
Inference in Qualitative Research, H61 KIN
D. Laitin (2002), Comparative Politics: The State of the Subdiscipline, in I.
Katznelson & H. Milner (eds), Political Science: the state of the discipline, JC11 POL
A. Lijphart (1975) The comparable cases strategy in comparative research,
Comparative Political Studies, 8/2. Serial JA1.C6
T. Landman (2003), Issues and methods in comparative politics: an introduction, chs
1 & 2, JF51 LAN
P.H. O Neil, Essentials of Comparative Politics, Ch 1, JF51 ONE
*B.G. Peters (1998), Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods, Ch1, JF51 PET
*D. Rueschemeyer (2003), Can One or a Few Cases Yield Theoretical Gains?, in J.
Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (eds) Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, H61
COM
Topic 2: State Formation
Sources available online:
L. Anderson (1987) The State in the Middle East and North Africa, Comparative
Politics, 20/1, pp. 1-18. [Electronic Journal]
R. Bean (1973), War and the Birth of the Nation State, The Journal of Economic
History, 33/1,pp. 203-221. [Electronic Journal]
R. Brubaker (1994), Nationhood and the National Question in the Soviet Union and
Post-Soviet Eurasia: An Institutionalist Account, Theory and Society, 23/1, pp. 47-78. [Electronic
Journal]
A. Cooley (2001), Booms and Busts: Theorizing Institutional Formation and Change
In Oil States, Review of International Political Economy, pp.163 180,
[Electronic Journal]
P. Gorski (1988), Review of Birth of the Leviathan: Building States and Regimes in
Medieval and Early Modern Europe by Thomas Ertman, Contemporary Sociology, 27/,2, pp.1868. [Electronic Journal]
J. Herbst (1989) The Creation and Maintenance of Boundaries: Africa, International
Organization, 43/4, pp.67392 [Electronic Journal]
J. Herbst (1990) War and the State in Africa, International Security, 14/4, pp.11739,
[Electronic Journal]
T. Knudsen & Bo Rothstein (1994), State Building in Scandinavia, Comparative
Politics, 26/2, pp. 203-220.
R.H. Jackson (1987) Quasi-States, Dual Regimes, and Neoclassical Theory:
International Jurisprudence and the Third World, International Organization, 41/4: 51950.
[Electronic Journal]
M. Olson (1993), Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development, The American
Political Science Review, 87/3, pp. 567-576, [Electronic Journal]
R. Stubbs (1999), War and Economic Development: Export-Oriented
Industrialization in East and Southeast Asia, Comparative Politics, 31/3, pp. 337-355, [Electronic
Journal]
Coursepack items:
C. Tilly (1985) War Making and State Making as Organized Crime, in P.B. Evans, D.
Rueschemeyer & T. Skocpol (eds) Bringing the state back in, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp. 169-191.
Other sources:
A. Adu Boahen (1987), African Perspectives on Colonialism, JV 246 BOA.
L. Anderson (1986), The state and social transformation in Tunisia and Libya, 1830-

1980, HN784.A8 AND

B. Davidson (1992), The black man's burden: Africa and the curse of the nation-state,
DT30 DAV
*H. Spruyt (2007) War, Trade and State Formation in C. Boix and S. Stokes (eds)
Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics, JF51 OXF
M. Mann (1986), The sources of social power, volume 1, HM131 MAN
M. Mann (1993), The sources of social power, volume 2, HM131 MAN
J. Migdal (1988), Strong societies and weak states, JF60 MIG
*B. Moore (1967), Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, HN15 MOO
O Neil, Essentials of Comparative Politics, Ch 2, JF51 ONE
G. Poggi (1990) The state: its nature, development and prospects, pp.86-116, JC421
POG,
Topic 3: Civil society
Sources available online:
E. Bellin (1994), Civil Society: Effective Tool of Analysis for Middle East Politics?,
PS: Political Science and Politics, 27/3: pp.509-10, [Electronic Journal]
S. Berman (1997), 'Civil Society and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic', World Politics,
49/3 pp. 401-429, [Electronic Journal]
S. Berman (1997) Civil Society and Political Institutionalization, American Behavioral
Scientist, 40/5, available at: <http://www-personal.umich.edu/~gmarkus/berman.html>
S. Berman (2003) Islamism, Revolution and Civil Society, Perspectives on Politics,
1/2, available at: <http://www.econ.barnard.columbia.edu/~polisci/faculty/berman/islamism.pdf>
N. Bermeo (1992), Democracy and the Lessons of Dictatorship, Comparative
Politics, 24/3, especially pp.283-8, [Electronic Journal]
A. Brysk (2000), Democratizing Civil Society in Latin America, Journal of Democracy,
11/3, pp.151-165, [Electronic Journal]
M. Foley & B. Edwards (1996), Paradox of Civil Society, Journal of Democracy, 7/3, pp. 3852, [Electronic Journal]
F. Fukuyama (2001), Social Capital, Civil Society and Development, Third World
Quarterly, 22/1: pp. 7-20, [Electronic Journal]
J. Hearn (2000), Aiding Democracy? Donors and Civil Society in South Africa, Third
World Quarterly, 21/5, pp.815-830. [Electronic Journal]
R. Jenkins (2001) Mistaking Governance for Politics: Foreign Aid, Democracy and the
Construction of Civil Society, in S. Kaviraj & S. Khilnani (eds.), Civil Society:
History and Possibilities, pp. 250-68, available at:
<http://www.bbk.ac.uk/polsoc/staff/academic/rob-jenkins/mistaking-governance-politics>
R. Jenkins (2005) Indias Civil Society, in P. Burnell & V. Randall (eds), Politics in
the Developing World, available at: <http://www.bbk.ac.uk/polsoc/staff/academic/rob-jenkins/indiacivil-society-randall-burnell-2005>
N. Kasfir (1998), The Conventional Notion of Civil Society: A Critique,
Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, 36/2: pp.1-20.
R. Lemarchand (1992), 'Uncivil States and Civil Societies: How Illusion Became
Reality', Journal of Modern African Studies, 30/2, pp.177-191. [Electronic journal]
P. Mouritsen (2003), Whats the Civil in Civil Society? Robert Putnam, Italy and the
Republican Tradition, Political Studies, 51/4, pp.65068, [Electronic journal]
P. Norris and R. Inglehart (2003) Gendering Social Capital: Bowling in Womens
Leagues?, a paper presented at the conference Gender and Social Capital, St Johns College,
University of Manitoba, 2-3 May. Online. Available at:
<http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~pnorris/Acrobat/Gendering%20Social%20Capital.pdf>
P. Oxhorn (1994), Understanding Political Change after Authoritarian Rule: The

Popular Sectors and Chile's New Democratic Regime', Journal of Latin American Studies, 26/3, pp.
737-759, [Electronic Journal]
A. de Tocqueville (1835), Relationships between Civil and Political Associations, in
Democracy in America, available online at:
<http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/ch2_07.htm>
G. White (1995), 'Civil society, democratization and development (II): Two country
cases', Democratization, 2/2, pp.56-84, [Electronic Journal]
L. Whitehead (1997), Bowling in the Bronx: The Uncivil Interstices between Civil and
Political Society, Democratisation, 4/1:pp. 94-114, [Electronic Journal]
S. Yom (2005), Civil Society and Democratization in the Arab World, Middle East
Review of International Affairs, 9/4, available at:
<http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2005/issue4/jv9no4a2.html#_edn4>
Coursepack items:
B. Moore (1967), Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, pp.413-32.
R. Putnam (2000), Bowling alone, pp. 15-28.
Other Sources:
J. Bayart (1986) 'Civil Society in Africa', in P. Chabal (ed), Political domination in
Africa, JQ1872 POL
J. Harriss (2001), Depoliticizing development: the World Bank and social capital, ch.
4, HC79.C3 HAR
J. Keane (1988), Democracy and civil society, JC423 KEA
*M. Morje Howard (2003), The Weakness of Civil Society in Post-Communist Europe,
JC 599.E92 HOW
R. Putnam, R. Leonardi & R. Nanetti (1993) Making democracy work, JN5477.R35
PUT
E. Shils (1991), The Virtue of Civil Society, Government & Opposition, Serial
JA1.G6
*S. Tarrow & C. Tilly (2007) Contentious Politics and Social Movements in C. Boix &
S. Stokes (eds) Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics, JF51 OXF
Topic 4: Transitions to Democracy
Sources available online:
R. Barro (1999) Determinants of Democracy, The Journal of Political Economy,
107/6, pp.158-83. [Electronic Journal]
S. Berman (2007), Lessons From Europe', Journal of Democracy 18/1, pp. 28-41,
[Electronic Journal]
N. Bermeo (1992), Democracy and the Lessons of Dictatorship, Comparative
Politics, 24/3, especially pp.276-9. [Electronic Journal]
L. Diamond (2002), Thinking About Hybrid Regimes, Journal of Democracy, 13/2:pp.
21-35, [Electronic Journal]
T. Karl (1990), Dilemmas of Democratization in Latin America, Comparative Politics,
23/1, pp.1-21. [Electronic Journal]
T. Karl & P. Schmitter (2002), Concepts, Assumptions & Hypotheses about
Democratization: Reflections on Stretching from South to East, esp. pp.12-24, unpublished paper,

available at:
<http://www.iue.it/SPS/People/Faculty/CurrentProfessors/PDFFiles/SchmitterPDFfiles/Democratiz
ation.pdf>
D. Rustow (1970), Transitions to Democracy: Towards a Dynamic Model, Comparative
Politics, 35/1, pp. 5166. [Electronic Journal]
L. Whitehead (2005), 'Freezing the Flow: Theorizing About Democratization in a
World in Flux', Taiwan Journal of Democracy, 1/1, available at:
< http://www.tfd.org.tw/docs/dj0101/001-020.pdf>
Coursepack items:
K. Adeney and A. Wyatt (2004), Democracy in South Asia: Getting beyond the
Structure-Agency Dichotomy; Political Studies, 52/1, pp.1-18.
S.P. Huntington (1991), The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth
Century, pp.3-30.
H. Kitschelt (1992), Political Regime Change: Structure and Process-Driven
Explanations?, American Political Science Review, 86/4, pp.1028-34.
B. Moore (1967), Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, pp.413-32.
G. Therborn (1977), The Rule of Capital and the Rise of Democracy, New Left
Review, 103, pp.3-41.
Other Sources:
K. von Beyme (1996), Transition to democracy in eastern Europe, JN96.A58 BEY
M. Bratton & N. van de Walle (1997), Democratic experiments in Africa: regime
transitions in comparative perspective, JQ1879.A15 BRA
P. Burnell & V. Randall (eds) (2007), Politics in the Developing World, JF60 POL
G. ODonnell, P. Schmitter & L. Whitehead (eds.), Transitions from Authoritarian Rule:
Prospects for Democracy. JF1051 TRA
B. Fowkes (1995), The Rise and Fall of Communism in Eastern Europe, HX240.7.A6
FOW
J. Haynes (ed) (2001), Towards sustainable democracy in the Third World, JF60
TOW
*J. Linz & A. Stepan (eds) (1996), Problems of Democratic Transition and
Consolidation, JN94.A2 LIN
A. Lijphart (1990), The Southern European Examples of Democratisation: six
lessons for Latin America, Government and Opposition, Serial JA1.G6
*B. Moore (1967), Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, HN15 MOO
L. Morlino (1998), Democracy between consolidation and crisis: parties, groups, and
citizens in Southern Europe, JN94.A91 MOR
J. Nagle & A. Mahr (1999), Democracy and democratization: post-communist
Europe in comparative perspective, JC421 NAG
O Neil, Essentials of Comparative Politics, Ch 5, JF51 ONE
*D. Potter (ed) (1997), Democratization, JC421 DEM
G. Pridham (1991) (ed.), Encouraging Democracy: the International Context of
Regime Transition in Southern Europe, JN94.A91 ENC
T. Vanhanen (1997), Prospects for democracy, JC421 VAN
L. Whitehead (2000), Comparative politics: democratization studies, in R. Goodin &
H. Klingemann (eds), A New Handbook of Political Science, JA71 NEW
P.W. Zagorski (2009), Comparative Politics: Continuity and Breakdown in the Contemporary
World, JF51 ZAG

SUPPLEMENTARY READING FOR THE SECOND ESSAY

Topic 5: The German Party System
Online Sources/Electronic journals
R. Dalton (2007) Politics in Germany: The Online Edition, Ch 8, available at:
http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~rdalton/germany/ch8/chap8.htm
J. Lane & S. Ersson (1997) Parties and Voters: What Creates the Ties?, Scandinavian
Political Studies 20/2, pp.179196 [a reply to Mair (1993)]
L. Helms (2007), The German federal election, September 2005, Electoral Studies, 26/1, pp.
223-227.
M. Janowitz and D. Segal (1967) Social Cleavage and Party Affiliation: Germany, Great Britain,
and the United States, The American Journal of Sociology, 72/6, pp.601-18
C. Lees (2006), The German Party System(s) in 2005: A Return to Volkspartei
Dominance, German Politics, 15/4, pp.361 375.
P. Mair (1993) Myths of electoral change and the survival of traditional parties. The 1992
Stein Rokkan Lecture, European Journal of Political Research 24/2, pp.121133
P. Mair (1997a), Party System Change: Approaches and Interpretations, Chapter 1, available
via the library website at Oxford Scholarship Online (IGNORE the message that says only the
abstract is available). http://www.bristol.ac.uk/is/library/electronicbooks/
S. Padgett (2001), The German Volkspartei and the Career of the Catch-all Concept,
German Politics, 10/2, pp. 51-72
F. Pappi (1984), The west German party system, West European Politics, 7/4, pp. 7 26
T. Poguntke (2001), The German Party System: Eternal Crisis?, German Politics,
10/2, August 2001 , pp.37 50.
K.M Roberts (2005), Explaining Party System Stability and Change, a paper presented to the
Political Economy Research Colloquium, Cornell University, 17 November. Available at:
http://falcon.arts.cornell.edu/Govt/PERC_files/roberts.pdf
Coursepack items
S.M. Lipset and S. Rokkan (eds) (1967), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Crossnational Perspectives, pp.13-23, and 47-54.
M. Maor (1997), Political Parties and Party Systems: Comparative Approaches and the
British Experience, pp.17-26
Books and Articles
*C.S. Allen (2001) Transformation of the German political party system: institutional crisis or
democratic renewal?, JN3971.A979 TRA
*D. Caramani (2008), Comparative Politics, ch 13: Party Systems, JA86 COM
*M. Gallagher, M.Laver, & P. Mair (2001) Representative Government in Modern Europe,
JN94 GAL
*A. Gould (2005), Germany, in J. Kopstein & M. Lichbach (eds) Comparative Politics:
Interests, Identities, and Institutions in a Changing Global Order, JF51 COM
P. Mair and G. Smith (eds) Understanding Party System Change in Western Europe,
JN94.A979 UND
Y. Mny & A. Knapp (1998), Government and politics in Western Europe: Britain, France,
Italy, Germany, JF52 MEN
S. Padgett (1986), Political Parties and Elections in West Germany, Ch 6, JN 3971.A98
S. Padgett (ed) (1993), Parties and party systems in the new Germany, JN3972.A979 PAR
*S. Padgett & T. Poguntke (eds) (2002) Continuity and change in German politics :beyond
the politics of centrality?, JN3971.A58 CON [This book includes hard copy versions of

the papers listed issue in 10/2 in the electronic journal German Politics]
*G Smith, W.E. Paterson, S. Padgett (eds) (1996) Developments in German politics 2,
JN3971.A91 DEV
*A. Ware (1996), Political Parties and Party Systems, JF2011 WAR
Topic 6: The French Party System
Online Sources/Electronic journals
S. Bartolini (1984), Institutional constraints and party competition in the French party system,
West European Politics, 7/4, pp.103 127.
A. Cole (1993), The Presidential Party and the Fifth Republic, West European Politics, 16/2,
pp.86-103
P. Mair (1997), E.E. Schattschneiders The Semisovereign People, Political Studies, 45/5,
947-54
Jae-Jae Spoon (2008), Presidential and legislative elections in France, April-June 2007,
Electoral Studies, 27/1, pp.155-60
Coursepack items
S.M. Lipset and S. Rokkan (eds) (1967), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Crossnational Perspectives, pp.13-23, and 47-54.
M. Maor (1997), Political Parties and Party Systems: Comparative Approaches and the
British Experience, pp.17-26.
Books and Articles
*D. Caramani (2008), Comparative Politics, ch 13: Party Systems, JA86 COM
A. Cole & P. Campbell, (1989) French electoral systems and elections since 1789, JN2959
COL
A. Cole (1990), The Evolution of the Party System, in A. Cole (ed), French Political Parties
in transition, JN2997 FRE
A. Cole (2000), The Party System: the End of Old Certainties, in G. Raymond (ed),
Structures of Power in Modern France, pp.19-38, JN2594.2 STR
*J. Evans (ed) (2003), The French Party System, JN2997 FRE
P. Culpepper, P. Hall, B. Palier (2008), Changing France, HN425.5 CHA
*M. Gallagher, M.Laver, and P. Mair (2001) Representative Government in Modern Europe,
JN94 GAL
A. Knapp & V. Wright (2001), The government and politics of France, JN2594 WRI
*A. Knapp & F. Sawicki (2008), Political Parties and the Party System, in A. Cole, P. Le
Gales & J. Levy (eds), Developments in French Politics 4, JN2594.2 DEV
A. Knapp (2002), France: Never a Golden Age, in P. Webb, D. Farrell & I. Holliday (eds),
Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, JF2051
A. Knapp (2004), Parties and Party Systems in France, JN 2997 KNA
*Y. Meny (2008), France: The Institutionalisation of Leadership, in J. Colomer (ed),
Comparative European Politics, JN94.A58 COM
A. Stevens (1996), The Government and Politics of France, JN 2594 STE

General departmental rules for undergraduates

Attendance at classes
The Department of Politics takes attendance and participation in classes very seriously. Seminars
form an important part of your learning and you need to make sure you arrive on time, having done
the required reading. If you miss seminars, even if it is for a valid reason, you will be asked to
complete catch-up work to demonstrate that you are not falling behind on the unit. These pieces
of work are required for credit points and it will affect your progression if you do not complete
them. You should also fill out a self-certification form. See section 2.4 of the Handbook for further
details.
Submission of coursework
Please note you will be required to submit coursework electronically using Blackboard, the
University of Bristols Online Learning Environment. Without an extension late work is subject to
penalties. See section 2.8 of the Handbook for details of these penalties.
Length
Each piece of coursework must conform to the length requirements listed in the syllabus. The
syllabus will confirm whether appendices are allowed. Work that does not conform to length
requirements will be subject to penalties. See section 2.8 of the Handbook for further details.
Referencing
Where sources are used they must be cited. Most types of coursework must contain a bibliography
and reference the material used. Inadequate referencing will result in marks being deducted. See
section 2.7 of the Handbook for penalties, where to get help with referencing and how bad academic
practice and plagiarism is dealt with.
Extensions
Extensions will only be granted by the Progress Tutor. Requests should be made directly to her.
Extensions will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances and they should be accompanied with
supporting documentation, for example medical certificates. See section 3.3.4 of the Handbook for
further details.
Fails and resits
See section 3.3.7 of the Handbook.
Course packs
Most units have course packs, which will be available from the end of week 0 from the Department
at 10 Priory Road. These are provided free of charge.
Mid-unit evaluations
Each unit will provide a mid-unit evaluation on Blackboard. Students will be asked to complete a
short survey to indicate how they feel the course is going so far. We appreciate your feedback and
encourage you to complete this survey.
Surveys will be open in week 5 (Teaching Block 1) and 17 (Teaching Block 2).
For further information, students should consult the Politics Undergraduate Handbook (available
online at http://www.bris.ac.uk/politics/current-ug/handbook.html) and the appropriate Faculty
Handbook.