Introduction to subnational policy: from warnings to approval

Abstract

Today a comprehensive analysis of political processes is impossible without use of a subnational comparative method. Subnational issue in political science passes three stages of development and now appears to be as an independent subject of scientific analysis. During a long period of time researchers analyze political processes in state exclusively at national level. There is idea that any manifestation of political life in a diminished spatial scale is only a projection of a national political life. It symbolizes phenomenon of the main in theory of politi- cal science. The main array of works in second half of XX century, which relating to democratization, are from a national point of view. Subnational issues have obliquely arisen in studies, which characterized by fragmentary comprehension, remarks or mentioning. This conceptual content characterizes devel- opment of subnational issue at first stage in 70's and 80's of XX century, a representation stage, that symbolizes first meeting of paradigm of that time and phenomenon that did not adapt, but existentially is always alongside with it. This whole-national in comparative political science changes in last decade of XX cen- tury, when it begins to explore various aspects of subnational politics, namely: territorial extension of processes of democratization. The first decade of XXI century is characterized by presence of research that representes an increased scientific and theoretical interest in subnational politics, supported by its own methods for measuring and classifying cases within subnational units of analysis. In 90's of XX century by middle of second decade of XXI century, which is chronologically second interval, stage of contact, is outlined in developing a subnational issue in comparative political science. It is a moment of communication between political practice and conceptual embryo (subna- tional comparative method), which is trying to understand it. In addition to approval of methodological issues and a large number of studies on subnational politics, transformation of paradigm bias from whole-national to monism becomes an important change. The monism is embodied in thesis that only unit of subnational analysis is subject of federative states that have a certain legally defined political independence, as opposed to administrative-territorial parts of unitary countries. The research trend of last four years (2014-2018) reflectes new practical implications for using comparative methodology in subnational politics. Studies show that monism overcomes today because work concerns unitary states in one or another way. The assertion of a subnational issue crystallizes in comparative science today and enteres into a stage, stage of collaboration, which, firstly, is based on dynamism of methodological principles of a problem, and, secondly, on autonomy of studying one's own subject.