Revision summary
Comparison substitutes for experiment, as Lijphart argued. Mill’s designs fail when variables outnumber cases. Galton’s problem and conceptual stretching are standing limits. Official data and Eurocentric concepts add political distortion. The method is disciplined inference, not a controlled trial.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
The comparative method is the main tool of Comparative Politics. It seeks general statements from a small number of States. Its limits are conceptual, statistical, and political.
Body
What the method tries to do
- John Stuart Mill’s method of agreement and difference is the classical template: hold some factors constant and vary others.
- Arend Lijphart treated comparison as a substitute for experiment when the political scientist cannot randomise regimes.
- Giovanni Sartori insisted that concepts must travel without stretching, or the comparison is only a word.
Main limitations
- Too many variables and too few cases: cabinets, culture, class, and colonial history cannot all be controlled in a handful of States.
- Galton’s problem: States copy constitutions and parties, so cases are not independent experiments.
- Conceptual stretching: democracy, federalism, or failed State mean unlike things in India, Belgium, and a post-conflict territory.
- Selection bias: studying only wars or only successful democracies distorts causes.
- Data are State products. Official turnout, growth, and rights scores may hide informal power.
- Value-laden concepts and Eurocentric baselines, which dependency writers and Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-system work also flag, make “development” a loaded yardstick.
- Language and meaning change the same institution. A vote is not the same act in every political culture.
What still remains
- Most-similar and most-different designs and process tracing reduce error. They do not make Political Science a laboratory.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD C[Comparative method] --> N[Few cases many variables] C --> G[Galton dependence] C --> S[Sartori stretching] N --> L[Limits of inference] G[G] --> L[L] S[S] --> L[L]
Conclusion
The comparative method is limited by few cases, dependent cases, stretched concepts, biased selection, and political data. It remains necessary. It is not a proof machine.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Bipolar structure of the world is more stable than the multipolar one. Comment.
Next question on this syllabus topic (2022 · Q1(d)). View answer →
-
Does the limit mean comparison should stop?
No. Difference is the reason to compare. The requirement is clear concepts and honest N.
-
Is large-N statistics free of these limits?
It eases the few-cases problem. It still faces stretching, dependence, and bad indicators.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2024 · Q2(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
What were the limitations of NAFTA? How did its replacement by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement counter them? Explain. -
2023 · Q7(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
What are the challenges and limitations in India - Iran relations?
More from this topic
Q7(a) · UPSC Mains 2026 · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks · Solution
How does illegal cross border migration pose challenges to India's security? Discuss the steps taken by the government in this direction and their effectiveness
Comparative Politics
Illegal cross-border migration undermines India's national security by altering demographic balances, straining economic resources, and exacerbating internal security vulnerabilities. The government has responded through border fencing, technological integration like SMART fencing, institutional mechanisms, and bilateral agreements. However, porous terrain, regional political complexities, and local connivance limit the complete effectiveness of these measures. A holistic approach combining strict border management with socio-economic development and robust legal frameworks is essential for sustainable containment.
Q5(d) · UPSC Mains 2026 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
Discuss the main features of the land-boundary agreement between India and Bangladesh.
Comparative Politics
• Operationalized via the 100th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2015 to resolve Radcliffe Line anomalies. • Rooted in the unratified 1974 bilateral agreement and the 2011 additional protocol. • Involved the peaceful exchange of 111 Indian enclaves in Bangladesh and 51 Bangladeshi enclaves in India. • Granted affected residents the sovereign right to choose their nationality and place of residence. • Demarcated roughly 6.1 km of previously un-demarcated land boundaries to end administrative confusion. • Secured human rights and welfare access for over 50,000 formerly stateless enclave residents. • Reduced bilateral trust deficits, paving the way for deeper cooperation in security and connectivity.
Q4(c) · UPSC Mains 2026 · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks · Solution
What is UNCLOS? Explain its salient features
Comparative Politics
UNCLOS, established in 1982, serves as the constitution of the oceans, codifying customary international law regarding maritime jurisdictions. Its salient features include distinct maritime zones ranging from territorial waters to the high seas, balancing coastal state sovereignty with freedom of navigation. It establishes compulsory dispute settlement mechanisms through institutions like ITLOS. The convention also mandates environmental protection and sustainable management of marine resources. For India, UNCLOS provides a rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific while respecting navigational rights. It remains central to addressing contemporary maritime security and resource challenges.