| ID | 133784 |
| Title Proper | Context and method in Southeast Asian Politics |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Pepinsky, Thomas B |
| Publication | 2014. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | This essay introduces and evaluates a central debate about context sensitivity in Southeast Asian political studies. Within this diverse field, there is no agreement about what context means, or how to be sensitive to it. I develop the idea of unit context (traditionally, the area studies concern) and population context (traditionally, the comparative politics concern) as parallel organizing principles in Southeast Asian political studies. The unit context/population context distinction does not track the now-familiar debates of qualitative versus quantitative analysis, nor debates about positivist epistemology and its interpretivist alternatives, nor even political science versus area studies. Context is not method, nor epistemology, nor discipline. Rather, the core distinction between unit-focused and population-focused research lies in assumptions about the possibility of comparison, or what methodologists call unit homogeneity. While I conclude on an optimistic note that a diverse Southeast Asian political studies (embracing many disciplines and many methodologies) is possible, the fact remains that unit context and population context are fundamentally incommensurate as frameworks for approaching Southeast Asian politics, and that population context is the superior approach. |
| `In' analytical Note | Pacific Affairs Vol.87, No.3; Sep.2014: p.441-462 |
| Journal Source | Pacific Affairs Vol.87, No.3; Sep.2014: p.441-462 |
| Key Words | Methodology ; Comparative Politics ; Southeast Asia ; Area Studies ; Context ; Geopolitical Studies ; Southeast Asian Politics ; Politics ; Asian Politics |