Mosaic of Regional Studies: A Case-Oriented Approach

The article is devoted to clarifying the heuristic possibilities of the case-based approach (case study) in comparative political science. This approach correlates with ideographic knowledge within the framework of the division of epistemology into nomothetic (comprehension of patterns) and ideographic (descriptive) sciences (W. Windelband); with understanding knowledge within the framework of the distinction between explanatory and understanding sciences (V. Dilthey) and a rich (thick) description in contrast to the "unsaturated" (thin) (K. Geertz).

By identifying different types of knowledge, the case-oriented approach acquires a threedimensional sound, meaning and content, opens up opportunities for in-depth development of political and theoretical concepts based on the reference material for the topic and allows you to obtain a rich texture in details and specifics. The relevance of the casual approach is largely determined by the limited resources needed to explore a significant number of countries, sometimes due to linguistic or geographical restrictions.

The specifics of the case study determine such an important requirement for the choice of a case as an informed choice of study objects. Since political institutions and processes are the central object of political science, and given the central role of the state as a key institution of political architecture, the configuration of the state and the policies it produces are the core of regional studies. Due to the fact that the concept of the state is an umbrella term and is characterized by conceptual tensions, it can potentially be applicable to polities of different times, which forms a request for clarification of the conceptual framework for considering the state as a category of political science.

Since States as independent actors determine the "rules of the game" in the context of international anarchy, it is the level of states as units of analysis that underlies structural and systemic studies of international relations and world politics: sovereign states act as the basic "cells" of the modern world order, despite the increasing importance of non-state actors. The position of a State in a hierarchical international system is derived from its national power, which, according to classical approaches, is interpreted as a derivative of parameters such as territory, population, economy, and military potential, including its nuclear component.

The proposed issue of Comparative Politics contains a diverse panorama of case studies characterizing the multidirectional evolution of a number of policies, including some BRICS members and EU members.

1. Almond G. (1988) The Return to the State. American Political Science Review 83: 853–901.

2. Apter D.I. (1999) Comparative political science. Political science: new directions [Sravnitelnaya politologiya. Politicheskaya nauka: novye napravleniya]. Moscow: Veche Publishing House: 378–379. (In Russian).

3. Badie B., Berg-Schlosser D. & Morlino L. (2011) International Encyclopedia of Political Science. Los Angeles; L.; New Delhi; Singapore; Washington D.C.: Sage. Vol. 2.

4. Barabash B.A. (2025) Transformation of the role of small states in world politics at the beginning of the 21st century. Dissertation… Cand. of Political Sciences [Transformatsiya roli malykh gosudarstv v mirovoy politike v nachale XXI veka. Dissertatsiya… kand. polit. nauk]. Moscow: MGIMO Publishing House. (In Russian).

5. Bates R. (2007) From Case Studies to Social Science: A Strategy for Political Research. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics. Oxford University Press.

6. Claude L.L. (1988) States and the Global System: Politics, Law and Organization. New York: St. Martin Press.

7. Cline R.S. (1977) World power assessment 1977: a calculus of strategic drift. Boulder: Westview press: 206.

8. Dynamics of innovation [Dinamika innovatsiy] (2011) V.I. Suprun (ed.). Novosibirsk. (In Russian).

9. Evans P., Rueschemeyer D., Skocpol T. (1985) Bringing the state back in. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 390.

10. Gaman-Golutvina O.V. (2005) Development of the category “political culture” in socio-political thought [Razvitie kategorii «politicheskaya kul'tura» v obshchestvennopoliticheskoy mysli]. POLITEX. Political expertise [POLITEKS. Politicheskaya ekspertiza] 1(2): 38–49. (In Russian).

11. Gaman-Golutvina O.V. (2015) Methods and types of comparative research. Comparative political science [Metody i vidy sravnitel'nykh issledovaniy. Sravnitel'naya politologiya]. Moscow: Aspect Press Publishing House: 70–110. (In Russian).

12. Gaman-Golutvina O.V. (2016) The BRICS Phenomenon as an Attempt to Respond to the Challenges of Global Competition [Fenomen BRIKS kak popytka otveta na vyzovy global'noy konkurentsii]. In: Political Science Facing the Challenges of Global and Regional Development [Politicheskaya nauka pered vyzovami global'nogo i regional'nogo razvitiya]. O.V. Gaman-Golutvina (ed.). Moscow: Aspect Press. (In Russian).

13. Gaman-Golutvina O.V. (2020) Types, Levels, and Designs of Comparative Research. Political Comparative Studies [Vidy, urovni i dizayny komparativnykh issledovaniy. Politicheskaya komparativistika]. Moscow: Aspect Press Publishing House: 105–127. (In Russian).

14. German C.F. (1960) A tentative evaluation of world power. Journal of conflict resolution. L: Thousand Oaks, CA 4 (1): 138–144.

15. Gerring J. (2017) Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2 ed.

16. Herron M.C., Quinn K.M. (2016) A careful look at modern case selection methods. Sociological Methods & Research 45(3): 458–92.

17. Ilyin I.A. (1992, orig. 1948) Against Russia [Protiv Rossii]. In: "Our Tasks". Historical Fate and Future of Russia. Articles 1948-1954. Paris-Moscow [«Nashi zadachi». Istoricheskaya sud'ba i budushchee Rossii. Stat'i 1948-1954 gg. Parizh-Moskva]. In 2 volumes. Moscow. (In Russian).

18. Ilyin M.V. (2008) Is a Universal Typology of States Possible? [Vozmozhna li universal'naya tipologiya gosudarstv?]. Political Science [Politicheskaya nauka] 4: 8–41. (In Russian).

19. Klepatsky L.N. (2009) The Role of the State in International Relations in the Context of Globalization [Rol’ gosudarstva v mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniyakh v usloviyakh globalizatsii]. Bulletin of the Russian State University for the Humanities. Series: Political Science. History. International Relations [Vestnik RGGU. Seriya: Politologiya. Istoriya. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya] (14): 133–144. (In Russian).

20. Kokoshin A.A. (2005) Real Sovereignty in the Modern World Political System [Real’nyi suverenitet v sovremennoy miropoliticheskoy sistem]. Moscow: Evropa: 140. (In Russian).

21. Kokoshin A.A., Kokoshina Z.A. (2024) On the Contours of the Forming New CentroPower Structure of the World Political System [O konturakh formiruyushcheysya novoy tsentrosilovoy struktury sistemy mirovoy politiki]. Moscow: URSS Publishing House. (In Russian).

22. Landman T. (2008) Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics. An Introduction. Routledge, 3 ed.

23. Lebedeva M.M. (2024) In Search of a New World Order: Interests of World Politics Actors [V poiskakh novogo mirovogo poryadka: interesy aktorov mirovoy politiki]. Political Science [Politicheskaya nauka] (2): 108. (In Russian).

24. Lijphart A. (1971) Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method. American Political Science Review 65: 691–693.

25. Lijphart A. (1975) The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2 ed.

26. Melville A.Yu. (2004) New Challenges for Political Science [Novye vyzovy dlya politicheskoy nauki]. Political Science [Politicheskaya nauka] (2): 16–36. (In Russian).

27. Melville A.Yu. (2018) The Power and Influence of Modern States in the Context of a Changing World Order: Some Theoretical and Methodological Aspects [Mogushchestvo i vliyanie sovremennykh gosudarstv v usloviyakh menyayushchegosya mirovogo poryadka: nekotorye teoretiko-metodologicheskie aspekty]. Political Science [Politicheskaya nauka] (1): 173–200. (In Russian).

28. Mikaberidze A. (2011) Conflict and Conquest in the Islamic World: A Historical Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO.

29. Modernization and Democratization in the BRICS Countries: A Comparative Analysis [Modernizatsiya i demokratizatsiya v stranakh BRIKS: sravnitel'nyy analiz] (2015). Moscow: Aspekt Press. (In Russian).

30. Mokken R.J., Stokman F.N. Power and influence as political phenomenon. Power and political theory: Some European perspectives (B. Brian (ed.)). L.: Wiley: 40.

31. Political Class in Modern Society [Politicheskiy klass v sovremennom obshchestve] (2012). Library of the Russian Academy of Political Sciences. Moscow: Rosspen. (In Russian).

32. Putnam R. (1993) Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press.

33. Ragin C. (1987) The Сomparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.

34. Rose R. (1991) Comparing Forms of Comparative Analysis. Political Studies 39: 454.

35. Sartori G. (1970) Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics. The American Political Science Review 64(4): 1033–1053.

36. Slaughter, A. (2004). The Real New World Order. Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press 7(3): 368.

37. Sokolov A.P. (2024) The Challenges of Crisis Response of the Franco-German Tandem after 2022 [Problemy antikrizisnogo reagirovaniya franko-germanskogo tandema posle 2022 goda]. Comparative Politics Russia [Sravnitel’naya politika] (2): 76–91. (In Russian).

38. Steinberger P.J. (2015) The State as a Universe of Discourse. The Concept of the State in International Relations (edited by Schuett R. and Stirk P.M.R). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press: 48–80.

39. The State in Political Science and Social Reality of the 21st Century [Gosudarstvo v politicheskoy nauke i sotsial'noy real'nosti XXI veka] (2020) I.S. Semenenko, V.V. Lapkin, V.I. Pantin (eds.). IMEMO RAS. Moscow: Ves Mir Publishing House. 6–7. (In Russian).

40. Timofeev P.P., Khorol'skaya M.V. (2024) European Security Dilemmas: A Comparison of Germany and France's Approaches to the Relationship of the EU and NATO Roles in Europe after 2022. [Dilemmy evropeyskoy bezopasnosti: sravnenie podkhodov Germanii i Frantsii k sootnosheniyu roli ES i NATO posle 2022 goda]. Comparative Politics Russia [Sravnitel’naya politika] (4): 132–154. (In Russian).

41. Wendt A. (1987) The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory. International Organization 41(3): 335–370.