Comparative Analysis of Security Policy 2022
BSSn4403 | Course syllabus
Lecturer: Mgr. Jaroslav Petřík, Ph.D.
Consultations: On session dates before and after the sessions in Krmítko. Otherwise please
email me to set up a call.
E-mail: australan@skaut.cz
Overview
This course is intended as a comparative analysis of security policy at various levels and in
various security sectors. The general theme of the course might be summarized as ‘from
security policy to state action’. The goal of the course is to develop and strengthen the students’
skills in understanding and analysis of various parts of comparison and analysis of security
policies. A secondary goal of the course is to demonstrate how the comparative method and
policy analysis are used within the research of the security field.
Outline
This course provides students with the analytical skills to critically investigate security policies of
various actors, including nation states, international organizations, and private actors. The
course is guided by three seemingly simple questions: what do we analyze, why do we analyze
it (for what purpose, what is the expected outcome, what questions are we trying to answer?)
and how do we design our investigation to find the answers we are looking for. The course will
introduce the academic field of policy analysis and familiarize students with its most important
methods and theories. Specifically, the course will cover approaches to the international, state
and individual level of analysis. It will unpack the process of security policy decision-making in
order to identify the most significant actors and influences on different types of security policies.
The course looks at the different stages of the ‘policy cycle’ (e.g. agenda-setting,
implementation and evaluation), the determinants of security policy (e.g. public opinion, political
parties, technology) as well as central themes in the study and implementation of security policy.
The course has a robust practical component, inviting the participants to explore key issues in
security policy analysis. They will compare and contrast security policies of different countries
and discuss variations in the security policy outlook of small, middle and great powers. They can
look into some of the most pressing topics on the current security policy agenda in different
issue areas, such as military interventions, the fight against terrorism or the security implications
of globalisation and the protection of human rights. In discussing these topics, the class will
support them in theory-guided analysis.
Course objectives
Upon finishing the course students will gain:
● An understanding of academic literature and debates on security policy;
● The ability to present theories, models and approaches that explain security policy;
● The ability to present and critique competing scholarly arguments as well as engage with
academic and non-academic literature on security policy;
● The ability to discuss security policy embedded in critical understanding of the issues
involved in security policy decision making;
● An understanding of the contexts, pressures and constraints with which security
policy-makers have to deal;
● The ability to undertake an independent comparative analysis of security policy;
● The capacity to critically examine policy proposals and articulate arguments pertaining to
security policy issues.
Session dates
1. 25 February | 3 lecture hours | Introduction to course + Requirements, Key concepts
(Policy analysis, Comparative approach, Theory and practice of Comparative research
design)
2. 18 March | 3 lecture hours | Discussion of key literature on previous topics; Case study
approach - number and selection in comparative research design
3. 8 April | 3 lecture hours | Case study presentations; Document analysis, Databases
related to comparative security policy
4. 29 April | 2 lecture hours | Project presentations I-II and critical discussion
5. 6 May | 2 lecture hours | Project presentations III-IV and critical discussion
Assessment
Students will receive a final grade for the semester based on the following components:
Form of assessment Maximum points
Activity and discussion during class 10
Paper or database analysis presentation 8
Comparative study project presentation 12
Final written paper 18
Final written exam 12
Class activity: To prepare students to be effective participants in security policy debates, class
participation counts for 16% of the grade and will be evaluated. This course will be
discussion-driven, debating the key concepts, literature, and findings from the participants’
individual research activities. Active participation in these discussions is expected from all
students. You also have to demonstrate your preparedness by understanding the key concepts
presented in compulsory readings and your ability to apply them to the topics discussed. The
participation grade includes being involved in class discussions based on the readings and
lectures, and being an active participant in all class activities. The maximum score for
participation requires: regular attendance and contribution to the learning environment of the
course by asking thoughtful questions (in response to readings, lectures and class discussions),
offering comments on course material that show insightful reflection, analysis of material and
synthesis of concepts, demonstrating an ability to link theory to cases and current events, etc. A
minimal participation grade will be assigned for regular attendance without the above-stated
contributions to class discussions. Students are expected to prepare thoroughly, attend
consistently, and engage actively in class discussions.
Paper or database analysis presentation: This is an individual task. For a paper analysis
presentation, the student will select an example of a research article using the comparative
policy analysis approach, analyzing a security problem. The student will then present to the
class their view on the methodological instruments the author used to analyze the problem,
focusing particularly on the challenges the author faced. It is expected that the student presents
their opinion on how the methodological challenges were addressed by the author, assessing
whether they were successfully overcome or whether the results of the paper should be
disputed on methodological grounds. For a database analysis presentation, the student will
select an accessible academic database of primary data that can be used for comparative policy
analysis in security issues (e.g. SIPRI Arms Transfer Database or PRIO Conflict Recurrence
Database). The student will then present to the class their own assessment of the usefulness of
the data (completeness, reliability), critically discussing the methodology the database uses to
create data points. The presentation cannot exceed 5 minutes. No two papers or databases can
be repeated. Students are required to enter their selection in a shared document prior to their
presentation. Presentations can only take place in Sessions 2 and 3.
Comparative Study Project Presentation: Students are required to choose one of the topics
listed below and work on a group presentation throughout the semester. The signup sheet will
be done online during the first week of the semester. Study projects should present a
comprehensive security policy evaluation in one particular area in two different countries. The
study project will be presented to the class during two final meetings. Each group will work on
the project strictly adhering to the following rules:
● Students assigned to a single topic work together as a team.
● Each member of the team has to present actively. Teams are not allowed to have one
spokesperson.
● Each project must be a comparative analysis.
● The study projects must assess the strengths and weaknesses of the selected security
policy in at least two states, and recommend the five most important things that
could/should be done to better address that problem.
● The presentation should focus on criteria for evaluation and their operationalisation. For
instance, if you decide to assess whether given policy was effective, efficient, and
legitimate, you need to explain how (and why) you measure effectiveness, efficiency and
legitimacy. Similarly, you need to explain clearly what and for what reasons is not
evaluated (e.g. collateral damage incurred by implemented policy or both positive and
negative unintended results not foreseen by the expressed policy objectives or the fact
that you focus on a particular geographic area or only limited time).
● Clear results are expected.
● Sources and literature have to be presented as well.
● Each presentation will be submitted in “Homework Vaults” in the IS MU at least six hours
prior to the class. The final result should be a 25-minute presentation (using PowerPoint
or other presentation program) held in the lecture room on the scheduled date.
Project topics can include the comparison of policies with a security dimension (e.g. Food
security policies, military policies, Public health in homeland security, Environmental security
policies, Cyber-security policies, Human security policies, Counter-terrorism policies, Border
security and immigration policies, Energy security policies, Cultural security policies,
Demographic security policies, Development cooperation policies, Foreign policies). The project
study has to compare the selected policies of at least two subjects (but more can be included),
or a single subject in at least two distinct time periods (e.g. the Bush administration strategy in
Afghanistan as opposed to the Obama administration strategy in Afghanistan). The entities
studied can include nation states, international organizations, security regions, sub-national
bodies or even private actors. The project topic has to be consulted with and approved by the
lecturer in advance.
Term Paper: Students are required to submit a written comparative analysis (5000 words,
references and bibliography included; longer papers are allowed only after consultation with the
lecturer) that will integrate concepts and evidence from multiple class sessions (assigned
readings and discussions) and additional research if desired. This is a master-level research
paper therefore the exact topic/area is selected by the student. The topic can but does not have
to be connected to the comparative study project especially that this is an individual assignment.
It can build on ideas developed throughout the semester or tackle contemporary security issues
from outside the scope of the course. If students focus on a security policy problem that has not
been a featured topic for this course, they need to show how what they have read, heard, and
learned in this class helps them think through that policy problem. The paper should contain the
proper theoretical and methodological framework for the analysis, explain the basis for variable
selection, and justify the chosen case study. The methodology has to be clearly identified (what
is compared and why, how the comparison was done (operationalisation, methods). Papers will
be evaluated on: originality of author’s approach, theoretical background, conceptualization of
the topic, structure, argumentation, sources and literature. Final deadline for submission will be
announced.
Additional Literature that can help you with this assignment:
● Eugene Bardach: 2012, A Practical Guide to Policy Analysis, 4th ed., Sage/ CQ, Los
Angeles,
● Nancy Cartwright and Jeremy Hardie: 2012, Evidence Based Policy - A Practical Guide
to Doing it Better, OUP, Oxford,
● Charles F. Manski: 2013, Public Policy in an Uncertain World: Analysis and Decision,
Harvard UP, Cambridge MA,
● David Weimer and Aidan Vining: 2014, Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice, 5th ed.,
Pearson, Harlow,
● Moran, Rein & Goodin: 2006, The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, OUP, Oxford,
Final Exam: There will be a final written exam, consisting of three questions: two theory-based
pertaining to the required readings and discussions in class and one focusing on various issues
of security policies. Each question is worth 4 points. During the exam the following criteria will
be taken into consideration:
● knowledge of the main theories and debates;
● knowledge of the core readings and main arguments presented therein;
● ability to support one’s claim with additional readings and/or case studies;
● ability to present logical argumentation;
● critical analysis of the problem supported by references to current issues pertaining to
various security policies.
Grading: The overall grading scale is as follows: A 60-56; B 55-51; C 50–46; D 45-41; E 40-36
Course literature
Required readings
● Breuning, Marijke. Foreign policy analysis: a comparative introduction. Springer, 2007.
Chapter 1 + Chapter 7.
● Caramani, Danielle. Comparative Politics. Oxford University Press, 2008. Chapters 2-3.
● Bemelmans-Videc, Marie-Louise, Ray C. Rist, and Evert Oskar Vedung, eds. Carrots,
sticks, and sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation. Vol. 1. Transaction
Publishers, 2011. Introduction + Chapter 1.
● Hague, Rod, Martin Harrop, and Shaun Breslin. Comparative government and politics.
Vol. 6. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Chapter 18.
● Peters, Guy B. Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods. Palgrave McMillan, 1998.
Chapters 1-5
● Hague, Rod, Shaun Breslin, and Martin Harrop. “Political science: A comparative
introduction.” Palgrave McMillan, 2016. Chapter 5.
● George, Alexander, L. and Bennett, Andrew. Case Studies and Theory Development in
the Social Sciences, MIT Press, 2004. Chapter 10 (Process Tracing and Historical
Explanation)
● Mahoney, James L., and Celso M. Villegas. “Historical Enquiry and Comparative
Politics.” Chapter 3 in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics, 2007.
● Sodaro, Michael J., and Dean Walter Collinwood. Comparative politics: A global
introduction. McGraw-Hill Companies, 2004. Chapter 3.
● Clark, William Roberts, Matt Golder, and Sona Nadenichek Golder. Principles of
comparative politics. CQ Press, 2017. Chapter 3.
● Lijphart, Arend. “Comparative politics and the comparative method.” American political
science review 65.3 (1971): 682-693.
Recommended readings
● Rihoux, Benoît, and Heike Grimm, eds. Innovative comparative methods for policy
analysis: Beyond the quantitative-qualitative divide. Springer Science & Business Media,
2006. Chapter 10.
● Pennings, Paul, Hans Keman, and Jan Kleinnijenhuis. Doing research in political
science: An introduction to comparative methods and statistics. Sage, 2006. Chapter 2.
● Fischer, Frank, and Gerald J. Miller, eds. Handbook of public policy analysis: theory,
politics, and methods. crc Press, 2006. Chapters 4-8, 18-19, 27-29.
● Landman, Todd. Issues and methods in comparative politics: an introduction. Routledge,
2002. Chapters 1 - 5.
● Engeli, Isabelle, and Christine Rothmayr Allison, eds. Comparative policy studies:
Conceptual and methodological challenges. Springer, 2014. Chapters 2, 4 and 7.
● Dye, Thomas R. Understanding public policy. Pearson 2013. Chapters 1-3.
● Hislope, Robert, and Anthony Mughan. Introduction to comparative politics: The state
and its challenges. Cambridge University Press, 2012. Chapter 2.
● Barry, Buzan. People, states and fear. Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1991.
Chapter 8.
● Franzese, Robert J. “Multicausality, Context‐Conditionality, and Endogeneity.” Chapter 2
in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics, 2007.
● Roberts, Geoffrey K. What is Comparative Politics? Palgrave, 1972. Chapters 5 and 6.
● Lim, Timothy C. Doing comparative politics: An introduction to approaches and issues.
Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2006. Chapters 1-3.
● Gerring, John. “The case study: what it is and what it does.” Chapter 4 in The Oxford
Handbook of Comparative Politics, 2007.
● Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich. “Comparative Historical Analysis in the
Social Sciences.” Cambridge University Press, 2003. Chapters 1-2, 9-10.
● Landman, Todd, and Neil Robinson. The SAGE handbook of comparative politics. Sage
Publications, 2009. Chapters on Case Studies and Process Tracing.
● Moniz, António Brandão. “Scenario-building methods as a tool for policy analysis.” In
Innovative Comparative Methods for Policy Analysis. Springer, Boston, MA, 2006.
185-209. Chapter 9.
● Hopf, Ted. “The limits of interpreting evidence.” In Theory and evidence in comparative
politics and international relations. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2007. 55-84. Chapter
3.
● Powell Jr, G. Bingham J., Kaare J. Strøm, and Russell J. Dalton. Comparative Politics
Today: A Theoretical Framework. Pearson Higher Ed, 2011. Chapter 4.
● Foreign policy : theories, actors, cases. Edited by Steve Smith - Timothy Dunne - Amelia
Hadfield. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. xxvi, 442. ISBN 9780199215294.
● Contemporary security analysis and Copenhagen peace research. Edited by Stefano
Guzzini - Dietrich Jung. New York: Routledge, 2004. xvi, 255. ISBN 0415324106.
● BAYLEY, David H.: Policing: The World Stage In Mawby, Rob I. (ed.): Policing across the
World. Issues for Twenty-first Century. London: UCL Press, 1999. pp. 3-22
● MORAG, Nadav. Comparative homeland security : global lessons. Hoboken: Wiley,
2011. xii, 388. ISBN 9780470497142.
● KUGLER, Richard L. Policy Analysis in National Security Affairs. New Methods for a
New Era. Washington: National Defense University. 1-84,
https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/Books/CTBSP-Exports/Policy-Analysis-i
n-National-Security-Affairs.pdf
● COLE, Eden – FLURI, Philipp – LUNN, Simon. Oversight and Guidance: Parliaments
and Security Sector Governance. Geneve: DCAF, 2015, 146 p.
https://www.dcaf.ch/oversight-and-guidance-parliaments-and-security-sector-governance