Sil, Rudra, and Peter J. Katzenstein. "Analytic Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics: Reconfiguring Problems and Mechanisms across Research Traditions." Perspectives on Politics 8.2 (2010): 411-431. Print.
What is the value of analytical eclecticism in the social sciences especially in international relations and comparative politics?
Analytical eclecticism is defined as a unique approach to research that determinedly addresses as well as selectively recombines substantive and theoretical scholarship elements that are produced in separate or distinct research traditions. It is not a means of displacing the existing or current scholarship modes. On the contrary, it can be viewed as a logical stance that is supportive of the efforts of engaging, complementing and selectively utilizing established theoretical constructs that are embedded in contending research traditions meant to build solid and complex arguments that conclusively bear on issues of interest, not only to scholars, but also to practitioners. Three features characterize analytical eclecticism: consistences with pragmatism ethos, formulation of problems that are relatively wider in scope that than the traditional ones, and finally, casual and complex stories that translate, extricate and recombine analytical component selectively.
Dependent variable- Research results on comparative politics and international relations
Independent Variables- Analytical Eclecticism
Review (Systematic Review) - Secondary research based on the exploration of peer reviewed journal articles, national and independent publications and books
Analytical eclecticism is not meant to act as a substitute existing approaches that are embedded to research traditions in comparative politics and international relations. It on the other hand, complements these approaches through various ways. First, it problematizes several complex phenomena that are encountered by ordinary research actors and practitioners, phenomena typically reduced to narrow and circumscribed puzzles by research traditions adherents. Secondly, it simultaneously traffics in theories from several traditions in the search of linkages between various mechanisms treated separately in research traditions. By so doing, it increases chances of scholars hitting upon hidden linkages, connections and insights that elude them when the world is simplified for purposes of analyzing it through singular theories or singular theoretical lens.
Easterly, William. "Can Institutions Resolve Ethnic Conflict?" Economic Development and Cultural Change 49.4 (2001): 687-706. Print.
What role do institutions play in Resolving Ethnic Conflict?
Ethnic Conflict is an aspect that has plagued humanity since time immemorial. Cases of ethnic conflict are rife in various parts of the world including Central Africa, Nigeria, Indonesia, and Balkans and so on. Such conflicts adversely affect growth, income and economic policies. this can in fact be the reason why the African continent which is notorious for its ethnical conflicts has lagged behind in matters of economic development and growth. The role of institutions in solving ethnical conflicts has come under scrutiny recently. Theories suggest that institutions play a key part in resolving ethnical conflicts. Institutions formed to give legal protection for example to minority communities, guarantee a society’s protection from being expropriated, grant freedom when it comes to contract repudiation as well as facilitate some cooperation in regards to public service can relatively constrain the level of ethnic conflicts
- Ethnic conflict
- Ethnic Diversity
Review- (Systematic Review) - Secondary research based on documented literature including peer reviewed scholarly, magazine articles, newspapers, independent publications and books.
Institutional factors usually interact with the level of ethnic diversity to determine whether ethnical conflict is enormously destructive or it plays by the natural rules. When institutions appear to be poor, ethnic diversity may have adverse effects on both economic policy and growth. Therefore, a combination of poor institutions and high ethnic diversity increases chances of ethnic conflicts and therefore poor economic growth. Consequently, good institutions play a huge role in the resolving of ethnic conflicts. They lower risk of genocides or war, which often result from the fractionalization of ethnic groups.