Letter from the Transitional President

This newsletter is the latest development in a trend that has been evident for some time now: qualitative methods are undergoing a renaissance unlike anything seen for the last 25 years. This resurgence has been demonstrated in a number of ways. Over one thousand members of the American Political Science Association, including twenty eight APSA Presidents and seven APSR Editors, signed the petition requesting that APSA create the new Qualitative Methods organized section (APSA-QM) that maintains this newsletter. In addition, not since the seminal works on qualitative methods in the 1970s by Harry Eckstein, Alexander George, Arend Lijphart, Adam Przeworski and Henry Teune, Giovanni Sartori, and Neil Smelser has there been such a concentrated outpouring of writings on qualitative methods. In the last half-dozen years alone, books published or soon forthcoming on qualitative methods and their philosophical underpinnings include those by Henry Brady and David Collier, Colin Elman and Miriam Fendius Elman, Alexander George and myself, Gary Goertz and Harvey Starr, John Gerring, Ted Hopf, Daniel Little, James Mahoney and Dietrich Reuschemeyer, Charles Ragin, Stephen Van Evera, Alexander Wendt, and Dvora Yanow (for citations to the books mentioned herein and many key articles as well, see the syllabi at www.asu.edu/clas/polisci/cqrm/syllabi.html). In addition, these methods are being widely used to address theoretical and empirical puzzles. A survey I’ve done with colleagues in the July 2003 issue of PS: Political Science and Politics in a symposium on methodology co-edited with Peregrine Schwartz-Shea of the University of Utah, indicates that nearly half of the articles in top political science journals use qualitative methods. While matching, and possibly exceeding, the level of development and application of qualitative methods seen in the 1970s, one development that distinguishes this new wave of productivity from its predecessor is a focus on developing institutions that can sustain and amplify it. APSA-QM is a vital part of this effort. It has the mission of promoting research and training in diverse qualitative methods; striving for an integrated understanding of these methods and their relationship to other approaches, including quantitative methods; and exploring the philosophical foundations of qualitative methods and of research design in general. The section defines qualitative methods broadly, including but not limited to case study methods, small-N analysis, comparative methods, concept analysis, the logic of inquiry, comparative-historical methods, the ethnographic tradition of field research, constructivist methods, interpretive methods, and relevant branches of social and political theory. This first issue of the newsletter exemplifies the goals of the new section and the ongoing renaissance in qualitative methods. I want to commend John Gerring for the outstanding job he has done in getting the newsletter off to a terrific start. The APSA related group, the Committee on Concepts and Methods, served as one of two ‘seed’ organizations for APSAQM. Let me take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Committee’s chair, David Collier of the University of California at Berkeley, and to mention three ways in which his efforts had such an important influence in the creation of the new section. First, David’s writings have been crucial in the recent revival in qualitative methods (for citations see www.polisci.berkeley.edu/Faculty/bio/permanent/Collier,D/). Second, under his guidance, the Committee provided a venue in APSA for panels, roundtables, and short courses on qualitative methods. Finally, David’s energy and enthusiasm in his