Working Papers #231 - 240

Click Working Paper title to download (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader).

Please note, not all papers are available for download at this time.

A New Discipline: Development Ethics

Denis Goulet

Working Paper #231 - August 1996

Denis Goulet, is O'Neill Professor in Education for Justice in the Department of Economics and Fellow of the Kellogg Institute and the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame. A pioneer in the interdisciplinary study of development ethics, he has conducted field research in Algeria, Lebanon, Brazil, Guinea-Bissau, Sri Lanka, and Mexico. He has held visiting professorships in Canada (University of Saskatchewan), the USA (University of California-San Diego and Indiana University), France (IRFED), Brazil (University of Pernambuco), and Poland (Warsaw University). His publications include ten books and over 160 articles and monographs.

A version of this paper appeared in Socio-Economics of Community Development in World Perspectives (Festschrift in Honour of the Great Eighteenth-Century Philosopher, Immanuel Kant), Volume II, published by MCB University Press, West Yorkshire, England, as a special issue of The International Journal of Social Economics.

Abstract

'Development' has long been equated with modernization and Westernization and studied as a straightforward economic issue. The discipline of economics has been the main source of policy prescription for development decisionmakers. This view is now widely criticized as ethnocentric and as economically reductionist. Change is occurring: economics itself is reintegrating ethics into its conceptualization, methodology, and analysis; a new paradigm of development is in gestation; and a new discipline, development ethics, has come into being. Development ethics centers its study of development on the value questions posed: What is the relation between having goods and being good in the pursuit of the good life; what are the foundations of a just society; and what stance should societies adopt toward nature? The new discipline emerges from two sources, which are now converging: from engagement in development action to the formulation of ethical theory, and from a critique of mainstream ethical theory to the crafting of normative strategies to guide development practice. Development ethics has a dual mission: to render the economy more human and to keep hope alive in the face of the seeming impossibility of achieving human development for all.

Resumen

Por largo tiempo el desarrollo ha sido asimilado a la modernización y la occidentalización y estudiado como un tópico obviamente económico. La disciplina económica ha sido la principal fuente de prescripciones para quienes deciden políticas de desarrollo. Esta perspectiva es hoy ampliamente acusada de etnocentrismo y reduccionismo económico. Están ocurriendo cambios: la misma economía está reintegrando la ética a su conceptualización, sus métodos y análisis; un nuevo paradigma de desarrollo está en gestación; y una nueva disciplina se ha constituido: la ética del desarrollo. Esta centra su estudio del desarrollo en el valor de las siguientes preguntas: ¿Cuál es la relación entre tener bienes y ser bueno en procura de la buena vida? ¿Cuáles son los fundamentos de una sociedad justa y qué actitud hacia la naturaleza deberían adoptar las sociedades? Esta nueva disciplina emerge de dos fuentes, que ahora están convergiendo: desde el comprometerse en acciones de desarrollo hasta la formulación de teoría ética; y desde una crítica de las teoría ética dominante a la elaboración de guías normativas que guíen la práctica del desarrollo. La ética del desarrollo tiene una doble misión: hacer más humana la economía y mantener viva la esperanza frente a la aparente imposibilidad de alcanzar desarrollo humano para todos.

(17 pages)

Mexico's Auto Industry After Nafta: A Successful Experience in Restructuring?

Juan Carlos Moreno Brid

Working Paper #232 - August 1996

Juan Carlos Moreno Brid has been a consultant to the Mexican Government, specifically to the Chief of Economic Advisers of Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) and the Secretary of Industry. His publications include the article "Structural Change in Mexico's Motor Vehicle Industry: 1977-89" in G. Van Liemt, ed., Industry on the Move (International Labour Office, Geneva 1993), based on a study he undertook for the ILO. Moreno Brid is a Visiting Scholar at the Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University. In spring 1992 he was a Visiting Fellow at the Kellogg Institute.

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Conference "Liberalization and Competitiveness: The New Opportunities in Investment and Technology in Big Emerging Markets," 5-7 May 1994, Center for US-Mexican Studies, University of California, San Diego. This revised version was completed before the collapse of the Mexican economy in December 1994.

Abstract

Mexico's motor vehicle sector is viewed as a most successful case in industrial restructuring. In the mid-70s it was an industry characterized by outdated machinery and incapable of competing in the international market. Today its manufacturing plants are competing worldwide in automotive production, exporting more than a million engines and 400,000 vehicles a year. This transformation is explained by changes in Mexico's positioning within the automobile global market as well as by the policies applied by the Mexican government to regulate vehicle production, imports, and sale in the country. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is changing the institutional framework of the Mexican economy and radically liberalizing its highly protected domestic automotive market. In this study we examine the evolution of Mexico's automotive sector in the last fifteen years and the various factors contributing to its transformation. The first section reviews Mexico's overall economic strategy and trade policy. The second focuses on the regulation of vehicle and auto parts production in Mexico. Clearly, trade restrictions have been very important for the development of Mexico's automotive sector. The third section deals with the performance of the Mexican automotive industry up to 1993, before NAFTA was put into effect. It is followed by some comments on the changes that NAFTA is already bringing about. In the final section, we present our view on the industry's outlook.

Resumen

El sector automotriz mexicano es visto como uno de los casos de reestructuración industrial más exitosos. A mediados de los setentas, era una industria caracterizada por la obsolecencia de su maquinaria e incapaz de competir en el mercado internacional. Hoy, sus plantas manufactureras compiten mundialmente en la producción de automóviles, exportando más de un millón de motores y cuatrocientos mil vehículos por año. Esta transformación se explica por los cambios en el posicionamiento de México en el mercado automotriz global, así como por las políticas aplicadas por el gobierno mexicano para regular la producción de vehículos, las importaciones y las ventas en el país. Hoy, el NAFTA está cambiando el marco institucional de la economía mexicana y liberalizando radicalmente su altamente protegido mercado automotriz. En este estudio examinamos la evolución del sector automotriz mexicano durante los últimos quince años y los varios factores que contribuyeron a su transformación. La primera sección reseña la estrategia económica general y la política comercial adoptadas por México. La segunda se concentra en la regulación de la producción de vehículos y auto-partes. Claramente, las restricciones al comercio han sido muy importantes para el desarrollo del sector automotriz mexicano. La tercera sección evalúa el rendimiento de la producción automotriz mexicana hasta 1993, antes que el NAFTA entrara en vigencia. Le siguen algunos comentarios acerca de los cambios que el NAFTA ya ha producido. En la sección final presentamos nuestro punto de vista sobre el panorama de esta industria.

(34 pages)

Accountability for Past Abuses

Juan E. Méndez

Working Paper #233 - September 1996

Juan E. Méndez, former General Counsel for Human Rights Watch and Director of the Inter-American Institute on Human Rights in San José, Costa Rica, was a Visiting Fellow at the Kellogg Institute during spring 1996. His early law practice in Argentina focused on labor law and the defense of political prisoners, and he was held in administrative detention from August 1975 to February 1977 under the state of siege. In 1982 he became Director of the Washington office of Americas Watch and in 1989, Executive Director of Americas Watch. He is the author of many articles in books and academic journals and of numerous reports for Americas Watch on human rights in Argentina, Colombia, Nicaragua, Peru, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, including Truth and Partial Justice in Argentina (1987), The 'Drug War' in Colombia: The Neglected Tragedy of Political Violence (1990), and Political Murder and Reform in Colombia: The Violence Continues (1992).

This paper is now available in the February 1997 issue of Human Rights Quarterly.

Abstract

The transitions to democracy in the 1980s have yielded a wealth of experience regarding the way societies reckon with a recent past of massive human rights violations. This paper looks at the most influential literature produced contemporaneously with those experiences and analyzes its current validity in the light of new contexts in which the issue arises. The author places emphasis first and foremost on the duties that the State owes to the victims of human rights violations and to society and then looks at the objective limitations that most transitions place on governments' ability to satisfy demands for truth and justice. These duties are part of an emerging rule of international law that demands that certain crimes should not go unpunished. But the obligations of the State to the victims and to society are varied and not dependent on each other; even if prosecution and punishment are rendered legally or politically impossible, the duties to disclose all that can be established about each violation, to offer reparations, and to dismiss the culprits from the armed and security forces remain fully in force.

Resumen

Las transiciones a la democracia en los ochentas dieron lugar a una significativa acumulación de experiencias en relación con la forma en que las sociedades ajustan cuentas con pasados recientes de masivas violaciones a los derechos humanos. Este artículo revisa la más influyente literatura producida contemporáneamente con esas experiencias y analiza su validez actual a la luz de los nuevos contextos en que este problema se plantea. Se propone observar, primera y principalmente, los deberes del Estado en relación con las víctimas de violaciones a los derechos humanos y con la sociedad y, en segundo lugar, las limitaciones objetivas que la mayoría de las transiciones plantean sobre la capacidad de los gobiernos para satisfacer demandas de verdad y justicia. Esos deberes son parte de un emergente regla de derecho internacional que demanda que ciertos crímenes no pasen sin recibir castigo. Pero las obligaciones del Estado hacia las víctimas y hacia la sociedad son variadas e independientes entre sí; aún cuando el enjuiciamiento y castigo resultaran legal o políticamente imposibles, los deberes de revelar todo lo que puede ser establecido acerca de cada violación, de ofrecer reparaciones y de expulsar a los culpables de las filas de las fuerzas armadas y de seguridad conservan plena vigencia.

(21 pages)

Ethnicity and Identity in the Caribbean: Decentering a Myth

Ralph R. Premdas

Working Paper #234 - December 1996

Ralph R. Premdas, a Visiting Scholar at the Kellogg Institute (spring 1996), teaches regularly at the University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago, in the Caribbean. Over the past two decades he has conducted extensive field work in Guyana and Fiji. Among his published works are Guyana: Ethnic Conflict and Development and Fiji: Ethnicity and Development, both published by the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development and by the University of Warwick's Research Series on Ethnic Relations. Other recent works by the author include Secessionist Movements in Comparative Perspective (Pinter, 1991), The Enigma of Ethnicity: Ethnic and Racial Relations in the Caribbean and the World (University of the West Indies, 1992), and Ethnic Identity in the Caribbean: Decentering a Myth (University of Toronto, 1995).

This paper was first delivered as a keynote address to the Association for the Study of Ethnicity and Nationalism at the London School of Economics and Political Science on 21 March 1995; the author wishes to thank several persons who have read and commented on it: Benedict Anderson (Cornell), Michael Banton (Bristol), Lloyd Best (Trinidad), Ken Bilby (Smithsonian), Gary Brana-Shute (Georgetown), Bridget Brereton (Trinidad), Joe Carens (Toronto), Michaeline Critchlow (Iowa), Ed Dew (Fairfield), Carlene Edie (Massachussetts), Cynthia Enloe (Clark), Steve Fenton (Bristol), Wsevolod Isajiw (Toronto), Richard Iton (Toronto), Michael Keating (Western Ontario), Abrahim Khan (Toronto), Franklin Knight (John Hopkins), Jerome McElroy (St. Mary's College), John McGarry (King's College), Martin Murphy (Notre Dame), Rex Nettleford (Jamaica), Guillermo O'Donnell (Notre Dame), Gert Oostindie (Leiden), John Rex (Warwick), Bonham Richardson (Virginia Polytechnic), Andrew Sanders (Ulster, Northern Ireland), John Simpson (Toronto), Steven Small (Berkeley), Jake Soderlund (Windsor), Jack Spence (Chatham House), and Crawford Young (Wisconsin).

This paper is now available in ed. Juan Manuel Carrion, Identity and Ethnicity in the Caribbean (University of Puerto Rico Press, 1997).

Abstract

This discussion of a Caribbean identity begins by embarking on a discourse about where and what is the Caribbean, followed by some brief remarks about the need for identity. The author presents an analytic scheme for understanding the construction of Caribbean identities. In the larger body of the paper that follows next, he examines individually the constituent elements that have featured in the formation of claims to a Caribbean identity at all levels of its expression and shows how difficult it is to maintain the arguments that are made for them. Finally, the paper offers a topology of identities that best describe the Caribbean situation.

Resumen

Esta discusión acerca de una identidad caribeña comienza por embarcarse en un discurso sobre dónde está y qué es lo caribeño, al cual le siguen algunas breves observaciones acerca de lo necesario de la identidad. El autor presenta un esquema analítico para entender la construcción de las identidades del Caribe. En el cuerpo principal del trabajo se examinan individualmente los elementos constituyentes que más se han destacado en los alegatos de identidad caribeña en todos los niveles de su expresión, y se muestra qué difícil es sostener los argumentos que en ellos se formulan. Finalmente, se ofrece una topología de las identidades que mejor describen la situación del Caribe.

(46 pages)

Party Discipline in the Brazilian Constitutional Congress

Scott Mainwaring and Aníbal Pérez-Liñán

Working Paper #235 - March 1997

Scott Mainwaring is the Chairperson of Government and International Studies at the University of Notre Dame. His books include Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America (coedited, Stanford University Press, 1995), Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America (coedited, Cambridge University Press, 1997), and The Party System and Democratization in Brazil (Stanford University Press).

Aníbal Pérez-Liñán is a PhD student in Government and International Studies at the University of Notre Dame.

The authors thank John Carey, Argelina Figueiredo, Mark Jones, Gerhard Loewenberg, John Roos, and two anonymous readers for many stimulating suggestions. They are also grateful to Barry Ames and Timothy Power, who provided access to the data base on which this research is based, and to David Samuels, who gave information on leaves and suplentes. Kevin Brunson and Patricia Ledesma helped devise and run computer programs.

This paper is now available in Legislative Studies Quarterly (November 1997).

Abstract

This paper analyzes party discipline in the Brazilian constitutional congress of 1987-88, focusing on roll call votes in 1988. Because of the large number (1,021) of roll call votes during the constitutional congress and the availability of an excellent data base, the Brazilian constitutional congress offers an opportunity for one of the most detailed studies that has been conducted of party discipline in a Third World legislature. We begin with a discussion of how we have calculated discipline scores, given some distinctive features of the Brazilian party system and the constitutional congress. We show that the biggest Brazilian parties of this period were comparatively undisciplined, and we also show that the leftist parties were a powerful exception to this general tendency. We demonstrate that legislators who switched parties during the constitutional congress were more likely than others to be undisciplined before switching and that their discipline increased markedly after their move to new parties. Finally, we attempt to explain why discipline was low in all but the leftist parties.

Resumen

Este texto analiza la disciplina partidaria en el congreso constitucional brasileño de 1987-88, concentrándose en votos nominales en 1988. Gracias al gran número de votos nominales (1,021) y a la disponibilidad de una excelente base de datos, el congreso constitucional brasileño ofrece una oportunidad para uno de los más detallados estudios que se hayan producido acerca de la disciplina partidaria en una legislatura del Tercer Mundo. Comenzamos con una discusión de cómo hemos calculado los niveles de disciplina, dados algunos atributos distintivos del sistema de partidos y el congreso constitucional brasileños. Mostramos que los más grandes partidos brasileños de este período fueron comparativamente indisciplinados y mostramos también que los partidos de izquierda fueron una poderosa excepción a esta tendencia general. Demostramos que los legisladores que cambiaron de partido durante el congreso constitucional tenían una probabilidad más alta que la de otros de ser indisciplinados antes de cambiar, y que su disciplina aumentó sensiblemente luego de su mudanza a nuevos partidos. Finalmente, intentamos explicar por qué la disciplina fue baja en todos los partidos excepto en los de izquierda.

(27 pages)

Is the Third Wave of Democratization Over? An Empirical Assessment

Larry Diamond

Working Paper #236 - March 1997

Larry Diamond is Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, coeditor of the Journal of Democracy, and codirector of the National Endowment for Democracy's International Forum for Democratic Studies.

This paper is the first in a two-part series."Is the Third Wave of Democratization Over?" Part II, subtitled "The Imperative of Consolidation," is published as Kellogg Institute Working Paper #237. Differing portions of both papers appeared in several chapters of Diamond's book, Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999).

Abstract

Since the Portuguese military overthrew the Salazar/Caetano dictatorship in April of 1974, the number of democracies in the world has multiplied dramatically. Before the start of this global trend toward democracy, there were roughly 40 countries in the world that could be rated as more or less democratic. The number increased moderately through the late 1970s and early 1980s as a number of states experienced transitions from authoritarian (predominantly military) to democratic rule. But then, in the mid-1980s, the pace of global democratic expansion accelerated markedly, to the point where as of 1996 there were somewhere between 76 and 117 democracies, depending on how one counts. How one counts is crucial, however, to the task of this essay: thinking about whether democracy will continue to expand in the world, or even hold steady at its current level. In fact, it raises the most fundamental philosophical and political questions of what we mean by democracy.

Resumen

Desde que los militares portugueses derrocaron la dictadura de Salazar/Caetano en Abril de 1974 el número de democracias en el mundo se ha multiplicado drásticamente. Antes del comienzo de este movimiento global hacia la democracia, había aproximadamente cuarenta países en el mundo que pudieran ser clasificados como más o menos democráticos. El número aumentó moderadamente entre fines de los setenta y principios de los ochenta, cuando una serie de estados experimentaron transiciones desde gobiernos autoritarios (predominantemente militares) hacia gobiernos democráticos. Pero entonces, a mediados de los ochenta, el ritmo de expansión democrática global se aceleró marcadamente, a punto tal hacia 1996 habían, dependiendo de cómo uno cuente, entre setenta y seis y ciento diecisiete democracias. Sin embargo, el modo en que uno cuenta es crucial para el propósito de este ensayo: pensar de si la democracia continuará expandiéndose en el mundo, o aún si se mantendrá en sus niveles actuales. En efecto, cómo uno cuenta plantea la pregunta filosófica y política más fundamental de qué queremos decir con 'democracia.'

(48 pages)

Is the Third Wave of Democratization Over? The Imperative of Consolidation

Larry Diamond

Working Paper #237 - March 1997

Larry Diamond is Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, coeditor of the Journal of Democracy, and codirector of the National Endowment for Democracy's International Forum for Democratic Studies.

This paper is the second in a two-part series."Is the Third Wave of Democratization Over?" Part II, subtitled "The Imperative of Consolidation," is published as Kellogg Institute Working Paper #237. Differing portions of both papers appeared in several chapters of Diamond's book, Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999).

Abstract

In Kellogg Institute Working Paper no. 236 I charted the progress of what Huntington has called the 'third wave' of global democratic expansion, from 1974 to the present, distinguishing among the various types of democracy that have resulted. If I am right in my analysis, democracy, and especially liberal democracy, will not expand in the coming years. It could recede into a reverse wave. It could just keep persisting, becoming less liberal and more artificial in the process. Or it could stabilize and sink firm roots in countries where it is now present-and even liberal-but not secure. If the historical pattern is to be defied and a third reverse wave avoided, the overriding imperative in the coming years is to consolidate those democracies that have come into being during the 'third wave.' In this paper I examine various conceptual approaches to consolidation and identify a number of challenges faced by new and insecure democracies. The paper concludes with a discussion of future prospects for democracy worldwide.

Resumen

En el Documento de Trabajo del Kellogg Institute Nº 236, examiné el progreso de lo que Huntington ha llamado la 'tercera ola' de expansión democrática global, desde 1974 hasta el presente, distinguiendo entre los varios tipos de democracia que han resultado. Si mi análisis es correcto, la democracia, y especialmente la democracia liberal, no va a expandirse en los próximos años. Podría revertirse en una ola de sentido opuesto. Podría simplemente persistir, deviniendo menos liberal y más artificial. O bien podría estabilizarse y establecer raíces firmes en países en los que ahora está presente--aún en su variante liberal--pero no está asegurada. Si hay que desafiar al patrón histórico y evitar una tercera ola de reversión, el mayor imperativo en los próximos años es consolidar aquellas democracias que se constituyeron durante la 'tercera ola.' En este texto examino varias aproximaciones contextuales a la consolidación e identifico una serie de desafíos enfrentados por las nuevas e inseguras democracias. El texto concluye con una discusión de perspectivas futuras para la democracia a nivel mundial.

(42 pages)

Indigenous Politics And Democracy: Contesting Citizenship In Latin America

Deborah J. Yashar

Working Paper #238 - July 1997

Deborah J. Yashar is Associate Professor of Government and of Social Studies at Harvard University and a faculty fellow at Harvard's Center for International Affairs. She is the author of Demanding Democracy: Reform and Reaction in Costa Rica and Guatemala, 1870s-1950s (Stanford University, 1997). Her various publications have addressed the comparative historical origins of democracy and authoritarianism, social movements, and political parties. Her research focuses on the contemporary emergence of indigenous movements in Latin America and their consequences for the practice and meaning of democracy in the region. Yashar was a Visiting Fellow at the Kellogg Institute in spring 1996.

An earlier version of this essay was presented at the Kellogg Institute, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, the 1996 International Studies Association Conference, Harvard University's Latin American Seminar, and Princeton University's Comparative Politics Seminar. A revised version of this paper isnow available in Comparative Politics 31 (October 1998): 23-42. For their thoughtful comments on earlier versions, the author wishes to thank David Collier, Michael Coppedge, Jonathan Fox, John Gershman, Doug Imig, Gerardo Munck, Guillermo O'Donnell, and Elisabeth Wood. Research was supported by the Kellogg Institute, the United States Institute of Peace, the American Council of Learned Societies/Social Science Research Council, and Harvard University's Center for International Affairs and the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies.

A revised version of this paper isnow available in Comparative Politics 31 (October 1998): 23-42.

Abstract

Ethnic cleavages have rarely given rise to political organizing and sustained political conflict in Latin America. Over the past two decades, however, Latin America has witnessed a wave of rural organizing and movement building that mobilizes Indians as Indians to advance and defend self-proclaimed indigenous rights. This paper addresses why indigenous identity has become a more salient basis of political organizing and source of political claims in Latin America over the past two decades. After analyzing alternative theoretical approaches, the paper proposes a historically grounded comparative analysis that situates indigenous identity and movement formation in relation to the process of state building and the changing terms of citizenship. Drawing on social movement theory, the author suggests the conditions under which identity and organization have merged to generate indigenous movements in the region.

Resumen

Los clivajes étnicos raramente han dado lugar a organizaciones y sostenidos conflictos políticos en América Latina. Durante las últimas dos décadas, sin embargo, la región ha sido testigo de una ola de organizaciones rurales y construcción de movimientos que movilizan a indígenas qua indígenas para realizar y defender los auto-proclamados derechos indígenas. Este artículo se orienta a determinar por qué la identidad indígena ha devenido una base de organización política más notoria durante las últimas dos décadas. Después de analizar aproximaciones teóricas alternativas, el artículo propone un análisis comparativo históricamente fundado que sitúa la identidad indígena y la formación de movimientos frente a el proceso de construcción de estados y los cambiantes términos de la ciudadanía. Abrevando en la teoría de los movimientos sociales, sugiero las condiciones bajo las cuales identidad y organización han confluído para generar movimientos indígenas en la región.

(30 pages)

Macro Comparisons Without the Pitfalls: A Protocol for Comparative Research

J. Samuel Valenzuela

Working Paper #239 - April 1997

J. Samuel Valenzuela is Professor of Sociology and Fellow of the Kellogg Institute at the University of Notre Dame. He was formerly on the faculty at Yale and Harvard Universities and has been a Visiting Fellow and Senior Associate Fellow at St. Antony's College, Oxford University. He has held fellowships from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation. He is the author of Democratización vía reforma: La expansión del sufragio en Chile and (with Erika Maza Valenzuela) of Religion, Class, and Gender: Constructing Electoral Institutions in Party Politics in Chile (from the University of Notre Dame Press and Macmillan). He has edited or coedited four books and written over three dozen articles for journals and books on the intersections between labor and politics, democratization in the nineteenth century and out of contemporary authoritarian regimes, and social change.

Valenzuela wrote a first version of this paper at Columbia University in preparation for research on comparative labor movement formation. This version is based on talks given in 1995 and 1996 at the Sociology Departments of the Universities of Pennsylvania and Stockholm. He thanks Erika Maza Valenzuela and Robert Fishman for help in sharpening its focus. He also wishes to extend his appreciation to many colleagues who have reacted over the years to his presentation of the approach to comparative analysis presented here, especially Elijah Anderson, David Collier, Marta Gil-Swedberg, Jeffrey Goodwin, Peter Hedstrøm, Walter Korpi, Orlando Patterson, Allan Silver, Theda Skocpol, Richard Swedberg, Charles Tilly, and Harrison White. His gratitude goes as well to the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, whose fellowship allowed him to put these ideas into article form, and to the Latin American Center at St. Antony's College, Oxford University, for its academic hospitality while he was writing this version. This paper is also in Politics, Society, and Democracy: Latin America, eds. S. Mainwaring and A. Valenzuela (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997).

Abstract

Comparative analysis is, with statistical and case study approaches, one of the three main tools for studying macrophenomena in the social sciences. This paper begins by delimiting its essential characteristics in contrast to the other two approaches, noting that it owes much of its strength to cases studies even though it focuses, like statistical methods, on explaining how phenomena vary, producing both similarities and differences among cases (the complex configurations of variables where the phenomena are studied). The paper then presents a protocol of research steps that must be followed in order to minimize the possibilities of error in using comparative analysis. It is easy to fall prey to such errors, given the many variables that must be examined in a smaller number of cases-the defining feature of this form of analysis. Juan Linz's work is frequently mentioned as among the most insightful in comparative analysis because it has followed, avant la lettre, the protocol presented here.

Resumen

El análisis comparado es, junto a los estudios estadísticos y de casos, una de las tres herramientas básicas de las ciencias sociales para estudiar los fenómenos macrosociales. Este artículo comienza con una discusión de sus características esenciales contrastándolas con las otras dos metodologías. Señala que el análisis comparado se apoya considerablemente en los estudios de casos, aunque trata, al igual que las aproximaciones estadísticas, de explicar cómo y por qué varían los fenómenos estudiados, produciendo tanto similitudes como diferencias entre los casos (las configuraciones complejas de variables en las cuales se estudian los fenómenos). El artículo presenta a continuación un protocolo de pasos que deben seguirse para minimizar las posibilidades de cometer errores al usar el análisis comparado. Es fácil caer en estos errores dada la gran cantidad de variables que se deben examinar en un número más reducido de casos-característica definitoria de este tipo de análisis. Se hace frecuentemente mención a la obra de Juan Linz, ya que su uso incisivo de la metodología comparada ha seguido, avant la lettre, el protocolo que se presenta aquí.

(26 pages)

An Asean Perspective on APEC

Yoji Akashi

Working Paper #240 - August 1997

Yoji Akashi, Professor Emeritus of International Relations at Nanzan University, Nagoya, Japan, specializes in Southeast Asia studies. From 1977 to 1985 he was Director of the Center for Japanese Studies at Nanzan and from 1985 to 1990 he was Dean of the Office of International Studies and Programs. He has been a visiting professor at the Universities of Malaya (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia), Nairobi, Zambia, and Tanzania.

This paper is now available in Economic Cooperation and Integration: East Asian Experiences, eds. Kwan S. Kim and Robert J. Riemer (UND, 1997).

Abstract

This paper presents the history of APEC in terms of the different goals and fears of the participants and their perceptions of each others' agendas. The author contrasts the Western approach, as exemplified by the US push to institutionalize APEC and introduce binding, formal agreements, with the 'Asian way,' which emphasizes consensus, consultation, and flexibility. By reaching a better understanding of why various key players acted as they did in the past, the author seeks to provide a guide to what should and should not be expected regarding the breadth, specificity, and enforcement mechanisms of future regionwide trade agreements in the Pacific Rim.

Resumen

Este artículo presenta la historia de la Cooperación Económica de Países de Asia en el Pacífico (APEC) en términos de las diferentes metas y miedos de los participantes y de sus percepciones acerca de los planes de cada uno. El autor contrasta la aproximación al tema occidental-tal como la ejemplifica la insistencia de los Estados Unidos para institucionalizar APEC e introducir acuerdos formales y vinculantes-con el 'modo asiático,' que enfatiza el consenso, la consulta y la flexibilidad. Entendiendo mejor por qué varios actores clave actuaron del modo en que lo hicieron en el pasado, el autor procura proveer una guía acerca de que debería y que no debería esperarse en relación con el alcance, la especificidad, y la aplicación de los mecanismos de futuros acuerdos comerciales regionales en la cuenca del Pacífico.

(24 pages)