Year: 2014
Type: article
Abstract: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) has been championed as a valuable tool for public policy research. Focusing on the field of policy evaluation, this research note assesses QCA by comparing research that uses this method to studies based on standard practices for quantitative policy analysis. While attention is centrally focused on causal inference, questions of measurement are also addressed. The analysis suggests that QCA adds little value to current methods of policy scholarship, and its contribution in fact falls far short, compared with present-day standard practices. For example, a properly defined “net effects” framework — which is pointedly rejected by QCA — provides valuable insights regarding the causal effects that are a central concern of policy evaluation. By contrast, as an approach to policy analysis, QCA suffers from severe limitations in both its framework and its findings.
Source: Policy and Society
Author: Sean Tanner
Institution: University of California, Berkeley
Language: English
Subfield: Sociology and Political Science
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W1980014966