Most evaluations include some qualitative data, whether in the form of transcripts or notes from interviews, answers to open-ended questionnaire items, photographs, observational field notes, videos, e-mails, meeting minutes, or other program documentation. Some evaluations use solely qualitative data to draw conclusions, some use qualitative data in a supplementary role to complement quantitative data, and some give equal weight to qualitative and quantitative data in an integrated mixed-method approach.

Qualitative Data Analysis

In this book, Andrew Harvey sets out to provide a unified and comprehensive theory of structural time series models. Unlike the traditional ARIMA models, structural time series models consist explicitly of unobserved components, such as trends and seasonals, which have a direct interpretation. As a result the model selection methodology associated with structural models is much closer to econometric methodology. The link with econometrics is made even closer by the natural way in which the models can be extended to include explanatory variables and to cope with multivariate time series. From the technical point of view, state space models and the Kalman filter play a key role in the statistical treatment of structural time series models. The book includes a detailed treatment of the Kalman filter. This technique was originally developed in control engineering, but is becoming increasingly important in fields such as economics and operations research. This book is concerned primarily with modelling economic and social time series, and with addressing the special problems which the treatment of such series poses. The properties of the models and the methodological techniques used to select them are illustrated with various applications. These range from the modellling of trends and cycles in US macroeconomic time series to to an evaluation of the effects of seat belt legislation in the UK.

Forecasting, Structural Time Series Models and the Kalman Filter

Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Edited by I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave. Pp. viii, 282. £3·50, paperback £1. 1970. (Cambridge University Press.)

In this innovative approach to the practice of social science, Charles Ragin explores the use of fuzzy sets to bridge the divide between quantitative and qualitative methods. Paradoxically, the fuzzy set is a powerful tool because it replaces an unwieldy, "fuzzy" instrument—the variable, which establishes only the positions of cases relative to each other, with a precise one—degree of membership in a well-defined set. Ragin argues that fuzzy sets allow a far richer dialogue between ideas and evidence in social research than previously possible. They let quantitative researchers abandon "homogenizing assumptions" about cases and causes, they extend diversity-oriented research strategies, and they provide a powerful connection between theory and data analysis. Most important, fuzzy sets can be carefully tailored to fit evolving theoretical concepts, sharpening quantitative tools with in-depth knowledge gained through qualitative, case-oriented inquiry. This book will revolutionize research methods not only in sociology, political science, and anthropology but in any field of inquiry dealing with complex patterns of causation.

Fuzzy-Set Social Science

Redesigning Social Inquiry Fuzzy Sets And Beyond

In recent decades, the introduction of market principles has transformed public service delivery into a hybrid. However, little is known about how these changes are reflected in the attitudes of private implementing agents: The hybridization literature neglects individuals, and street-level bureaucracy research has disregarded hybridization. This article extends Hupe and Hill's (2007) accountability regimes framework to introduce the market as an additional accountability regime alongside state, profession, and society. Using a configurational approach, the article explores how public and private food safety inspectors in Switzerland perceive the multiple norms for behavior stemming from their environment. Results suggest that the plural accountabilities of for-profit street-level bureaucrats can increase the dilemmas involved in their work. Under certain circumstances, for-profit street-level bureaucrats have particular difficulties reconciling rule pressure with market incentives and client demands. The extended accountability regimes framework fruitfully captures such dilemmas and helps identify suitable governance responses.

/pdf/serving-many-masters-public-accountability-in-private-policy-2aba5ue9cp.pdf

Serving many masters: Public accountability in private policy implementation

Research on implementation in the European Union (EU) is characterized by a strong focus on legal conformance with EU policy. However, this focus has been criticized for insufficiently accounting for the implications of the EU’s multilevel governance structure, thus providing an incomplete picture of EU implementation, its diversity and practice. The contributions of this collection represent a shift towards a more performance-oriented perspective on EU implementation as problem-solving. They approach implementation fundamentally as a process of interpretation of superordinate law by actors who are embedded within multiple contexts arising from the coexistence of dynamics of Europeanization, on the one hand, and what has been termed ‘domestication’, on the other. Moving beyond legal compliance, the contributions provide new evidence on the diversity of domestic responses to EU policy, the roles and motivations of actors implementing EU policy, and the ‘black box’ of EU law in action and its enforc...

/pdf/moving-beyond-legal-compliance-innovative-approaches-to-eu-4x2ldctxcp.pdf

Moving beyond legal compliance: innovative approaches to EU multilevel implementation

This article presents an innovative evaluation design which was used to evaluate the Swiss Environmental Impact Assessment. The design is new in that it amalgamates the realistic approach to evaluation with the method of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), the two of which are conspicuously similar. They share a complex view of causality, a generative perspective, a theory-driven approach to empirical observation and a limited claim to generalization. These conceptual parallels, as derived from the literature, are described in the first section, after a short introduction to realistic evaluation and the method of QCA. The following empirical section exemplifies their joint application and tackles the problems encountered. Based on this experience, the initial theoretical parallels are then reviewed. The article concludes that, under certain conditions, realistic evaluation and QCA provide a powerful tandem to produce empirically well-grounded context-sensitive evidence on policy instruments.

Realistic Evaluation and QCA: Conceptual Parallels and an Empirical Application

Convergence between Woodrow Wilson's and Max Weber's thought, as well as their differences with regard to the politics–administration dichotomy, can be ascribed to the Hegelian tradition of public administrative theory. On the one hand, Wilson was strongly influenced by Georg W. F. Hegel. On the other hand, there is an empirical connection between Hegel and Weber. Both shared a consciousness of the German bureaucratic tradition based on Hegel's Philosophy of Right. These insights have important methodological and theoretical implications for the contemporary comparative study of public administration.

Weber, Wilson, and Hegel: Theories of Modern Bureaucracy

Blame avoidance behavior (BAB) encompasses all kinds of integrity-protecting activities by
officeholders in the face of potentially blame-attracting events Although considered essential
for a realistic understanding of politics and policymaking, a general understanding of this
multi-faceted behavioral phenomenon and its implications has been lacking to date We
argue that this is due to the lack of careful conceptualization of various forms of BAB
Crucially, the difference between anticipatory and reactive forms of BAB is largely neglected
in the literature This paper links anticipatory and reactive forms of BAB as two consecutive
decision situations It exposes dependence relationships between the situations that trigger
BAB, the rationalities at work, the resources and strategies applied by blame-avoiding
actors, and the various consequences thereof The paper concludes that anticipatory and
reactive BAB are distinct phenomena that require specific research approaches to assess their
relevance for the workings of polities

/pdf/anticipatory-and-reactive-forms-of-blame-avoidance-of-foxes-5ftp0vq9en.pdf

Fritz Sager

Papers

Serving many masters: Public accountability in private policy implementation

Moving beyond legal compliance: innovative approaches to EU multilevel implementation

Realistic Evaluation and QCA: Conceptual Parallels and an Empirical Application

Weber, Wilson, and Hegel: Theories of Modern Bureaucracy

Anticipatory and reactive forms of blame avoidance: of foxes and lions