Who is Afraid of Comulative Research?: Improving Data on EU Politics
| Author | Gerald Schneider,Simon Hix,Matthew Gabel |
| Published date | 01 December 2002 |
| Date | 01 December 2002 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1465116502003004005 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Forum Section
Who Is Afraid of Cumulative
Research?
Improving Data on EU Politics
Matthew Gabel
University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA
Simon Hix
London School of Economics and Political Science, UK
Gerald Schneider
University of Konstanz, Germany
Introduction
The study of European Union (EU) politics has matured in important ways
in the past two decades. In place of the grand yet vague focus on the study
of European integration writ large, scholars have increasingly organized them-
selves into research communities focusing on particular aspects of European
Union governance. With this specialization, scholars in each community have
advanced towards agreement on definitions and conceptual characterizations.
These ‘ground rules’ are essential to the collective research enterprise and the
advancement of knowledge. However, we are concerned that this advance-
ment is retarded unnecessarily by the dearth of public and systematically col-
lected data on EU politics. In short, such data are essential if the field
endeavours to move toward ‘normal science’.
It is our opinion that too little attention has been given to disseminating
information about available data and, more fundamentally, to the collection
of such data. In this essay, we argue that the cumulation of knowledge in the
study of European Union politics depends crucially on expanding the amount
481
European Union Politics
[1465-1165(200212)3:4]
Volume 3 (4): 481–500: 028521
Copyright© 2002
SAGE Publications
London, Thousand Oaks CA,
New Delhi
05 gabel (jk/d) 25/10/02 3:06 pm Page 481
of public systematic data. We then describe the data currently available across
a broad range of research communities. In so doing, we hope this essay
provides an effective means of disseminating information about available
data. We intend to provide a continuously updated list of such data sets on
our journal website. Finally, we describe an agenda for future data collection,
focusing on a variety of areas in which data are particularly scarce.
Cumulation in the study of EU politics
In political science and elsewhere, many people have recognized recently that
we need to invest more time in what is the normal standard in the natural
sciences – cumulation. By this we mean that we are able to establish empiri-
cally tested theory only if a large enough group of people works on the same
problem and cumulates knowledge through the repeated and competitive
testing of its key propositions. Although the critical rationalism advocated by
Karl Popper has some flaws, its one key insight still seems valid: we can accept
a certain hypothesis only if it survives critical theoretical challenges and
empirical replications. In international relations, the key proposition of the
democratic peace literature that pairs of sufficiently democratized states have
a lower likelihood of engaging in militarized conflicts has survived repeated
challenges by leading methodologists and is now considered to be one of the
few non-trivial insights within the subfield (e.g. Russett and Oneal, 2001). In
comparative politics, a large body of replication studies has confirmed that
economic factors influence voters’ decisions across a wide range of political
systems (e.g. Lewis-Beck and Stegmaier, 2000).
The success in establishing the democratic peace and economic voting as
key insights was, however, possible only because the research community
started to build on the same resources. One key prerequisite of cumulation is
thus the existence of some core data sets on which groups of scholars with
different theoretical priors can rely. Obviously, building up such data sets does
not solve all problems because researchers still might disagree over the proper
definition of some key concepts or use different methods. Yet, without data
that are accessible to many colleagues, we cannot even move to the stage of
competitive testing.
Although the study of EU politics has developed considerably, we still
lack scientific maturity in the key area of data accumulation and integration.
On the positive side, conflict over the scope of study in many areas of EU
research is no longer a crucial impediment to the advancement of knowledge.
But few research communities have built a common data set that is sufficient
to advance knowledge. One example is the study of public support for
European Union Politics 3(4)
482
05 gabel (jk/d) 25/10/02 3:06 pm Page 482
To continue reading
Request your trial