Case
Abstract
In the field of Political Science and International Relations, there is a robust debate over whether valid, scientifically sound findings are only derived from large statistical studies, or whether qualitative approaches such as case studies can offer an important, equally valid contribution to the field. This leads to the question, ‘how can one engage in in-depth case studies that provide rich detail relevant to policy analysis, yet not give up the validity provided by large statistical studies that meet scientific criteria?’ Using Alexander George's method of structured, focused comparison, this case study illustrates a comparative study of a small number of cases can be fruitful and contribute to broader knowledge in the field. In-depth case studies provide valuable material for policy relevant analysis, while the structured and focused approach ensures that the data from the cases are comparable. This method is especially useful in formulating explanatory ideas that help identify areas requiring further study in order to refine both theory and practice. In my research illustrated here, I find that existing frameworks do not account for the actions of all stakeholders in internal conflicts and call for additional research to address this gap.