From the Inside Out: Ethnographic Methods in Political Research

Abstract

D insider perspectives and groundlevel processes “matter” in political life? Do ethnographic approaches to the study of politics have a place in the discipline? How one answers these questions depends on the particular research question(s) being asked and the epistemological predispositions of the researcher(s). But, even the staunchest proponents of deductive, quantitative, and rational choice approaches tend to answer with a qualified “yes.” For those occasions when these phenomena indeed warrant study, ethnographic methods are among the tools in the methodological toolbox. Yet, it is striking how few political scientists reach for them, and how even fewer become expert in their use. The rising technical sophistication of computer-aided methods might make ethnographic study seem lacking in rigor—a sort of quaint relic of yesteryear. As part of a drive to take calls for methodological pluralism seriously, this article addresses the question of ethnography’s utility, suggesting that it sheds crucial light on central issues about political life. We are motivated by a truism that bears repeating: if we privilege certain methods of inquiry over others, we lose the potential to generate important insights about the political world. Our purpose in this article is threefold. First, we suggest that the marginalization of ethnographic methods leads to a lamentable state of affairs in which certain types of research questions a priori are undervalued by the discipline. Second, we argue that the usual criticisms of ethnographic methods are rooted in inaccuracies about what ethnographic work entails. Like other approaches, ethnography has shortcomings, but if used judiciously, its contribution is noteworthy. Third, given the marginalization of ethnographic methods, we suggest that a positive agenda for incorporating them into graduate curricula should be a central part of reform in the discipline.