Doing comparative case study research in urban and regional studies: what can be learnt from practice?

References

• Abrahams, G. (2014). What “is” territorial cohesion? What does it “do”? Essentialist versus pragmatic approaches to using concepts. European Planning Studies, 22(10), 2134–2155. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2013.819838
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelin, A., Johansson, H., & Koch, M. (2014). Patterns of institutional change in minimum income protection in Sweden and Germany. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 30(2), 165–179. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/21699763.2014.937584
   Google Scholar
• Barberis, E., Grossmann, K., Kullmann, K., Skovgaard Nielsen, R., & Hedegaard Winther, A. (2019). Governance arrangements targeting diversity in Europe: How new public management impacts working with social cohesion. Urban Geography, 40(7), 964–983. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2018.1511190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belcher, B., Rasmussen, K., Kemshaw, M., & Zornes, D. (2015). Defining and assessing research quality in a transdisciplinary context. Research Evaluation, 25(1), 1–17. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernt, M., Haase, A., Großmann, K., Cocks, M., Couch, C., Cortese, C., & Krzysztofik, R. (2014). How does(n’t) urban shrinkage get onto the Agenda? Experiences from Leipzig, Liverpool, Genoa and Bytom. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(5), 1749–1766. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blatter, J., & Blume, T. (2008). In search of co-variance, causal mechanisms or congruence? Towards a plural understanding of case studies. Swiss Political Science Review, 14(2), 315–356. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2008.tb00105.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolt, G. (2017). Final report summary – DIVERCITIES.: DIVERCITIES project. EU FP7 project ID 319970. Utrecht: Utrecht University, Faculty of Geosciences. Retrieved from European Commission: CORDIS website: https://cordis.europa.eu/result/rcn/203171_en.html
   Google Scholar
• Citispyce Repository of Case Studies: Case Studies of Socially Innovative Practices. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.citispyce.eu/citispyce-repository-case-studies
   Google Scholar
• Cortese, C., Haase, A., Grossmann, K., & Ticha, I. (2014). Governing social cohesion in shrinking cities: The cases of Ostrava, Genoa and Leipzig. European Planning Studies, 22(10), 2050–2066. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2013.817540
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davoudi, S. (2005). Understanding territorial cohesion. Planning, Practice & Research, 20(4), 433–441. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02697450600767926
   Google Scholar
• DiGaetano, A., & Strom, E. (2003). Comparative urban governance: An integrated approach. Urban Affairs Review, 38(3), 356–395. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087402238806
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elwood, S., Lawson, V., & Sheppard, E. (2016). Geographical relational poverty studies. Progress in Human Geography, 41(6), 745–765. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516659706
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission (EC). (n.d.). Territorial cohesion: What is regional policy? Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/what/glossary/t/territorial-cohesion
   Google Scholar
• Faludi, A. (2013). Territorial cohesion, territorialism, territoriality, and soft planning: A critical review. Environment and Planning A, 45(6), 1302–1317. doi: https://doi.org/10.1068/a45299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fontana, M.-C., Afonso, A., & Papadopoulos, Y. (2008). Putting the special case in its place: Switzerland and small-N comparison in policy research. Swiss Political Science Review, 14(3), 521–550. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2008.tb00111.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerring, J. (2017). Strategies for social inquiry. Case study research: Principles and practices (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goertz, G. (2017). Multimethod research, causal mechanisms, and case studies: An integrated approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haase, A., Bernt, M., Großmann, K., Mykhnenko, V., & Rink, D. (2016). Varieties of shrinkage in European cities. European Urban and Regional Studies, 23(1), 86–102. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776413481985
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haase, A., Rink, D., Grossmann, K., Bernt, M., & Mykhnenko, V. (2014). Conceptualizing urban shrinkage. Environment and Planning A, 46(7), 1519–1534. doi: https://doi.org/10.1068/a46269
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, G. (2002). California studies in critical human geography: Vol. 10. Disabling globalization: Places of Power in Post-Apartheid South Africa. University of California Press. Retrieved from https://www.ucpress.edu/op.php?isbn=9780520237568
   Google Scholar
• Hart, G. (2018). Relational comparison revisited: Marxist postcolonial geographies in practice. Progress in Human Geography, 42(3), 371–394. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516681388
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2012). The universal and the contingent: Some reflections on the transnational flow of planning ideas and practices. Planning Theory, 11(2), 188–207. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095211419333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hussain, A., & Higson, H. (2014). WP4 Comparative Report of “Fieldwork II” (Deliverable No. 4.4). Retrieved from https://www.citispyce.eu/sites/default/files/D4.420WP420Final20Comparative20Report203120July14_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hvinden, B., & Halvorsen, R. (2012). Political implications of the current debate on poverty, deprivation and social exclusion in Europe: What guidance do scholarly perspectives and conceptualisations offer? (Deliverable No. 2.1). Oslo. Retrieved from https://uol.de/fileadmin/user_upload/sowi/ag/sozialstruktur/download/Paper_Political_implications.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jessoula, M. (2015). Europe 2020 and the fight against poverty – beyond competence clash, towards ‘hybrid’ governance solutions? Social Policy & Administration, 49(4), 490–511. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jessoula, M., Sabato, S., Agostini, C., & Madama, I. (2014). Work package 4. Multilevel “arenas” for fighting poverty and social exclusion: The Europe 2020 anti-poverty arena (Deliverable No. 4.7). Milan. Retrieved from https://cope-research.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/COPE_Deliverable-4.7.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Johansson, H., Panican, A., Angelin, A., & Koch, M. (2013). Combating poverty in Europe: Multi-level, multi-dimensional and multi-stakeholder models in local active inclusion policies: COPE project. EU FP7 project ID 290488 [WP 6 Comparative Report]. Lund. Retrieved from University of Lund website: https://cope-research.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/WP6_Comparative_Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jubany, O., & Güell, B. (n.d. (2016)). The importance of listening: Adopting a qualitative methodology. In CITISPYCE final report: Part I (pp. 46–86) (Deliverable No. 8.2). Birmingham: Aston University.
   Google Scholar
• Kantor, P., & Savitch, H. (2005). How to study comparative urban development politics: A research note. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(1), 135–151. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00575.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazepov, Y., Saruis, T., Wukovitsch, F., Cools, P., & Novy, A. (2013). ImPRovE D.14.1. How to study social innovation in poverty analysis. Methods and methodologies.: ImPRovE project. EU FP7 project ID 290613. Antwerp: Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy – University of Antwerp. Retrieved from http://improve-research.eu/?wpdmact=process%26did=NDYuaG90bGluaw
   Google Scholar
• Kovács, Z., Murie, A., Musterd, S., Gritsai, O., & Pethe, H. (2007). ACRE report 3: Comparing paths of creative knowledge regions: ACRE project. EU FP6 project ID 028270. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. Retrieved from http://old.nbu.bg/PUBLIC/IMAGES/File/departamenti/centyr_soc_praktiki/WP3final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kozek, W., & Kubisa, J. (2014). The impact of welfare interventions on life-courses of deprived groups: COPE project. EU FP7 project ID 290488 [ Work Package 7]. Warsaw: University of Warsaw. Retrieved from https://cope-research.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/WP7_Comparative_Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lees, L. (2012). The geography of gentrification: Thinking through comparative urbanism. Progress in Human Geography, 36(2), 155–171. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132511412998
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maloutas, T., & Souliotis, N. (2015). Living with diversity (Policy Brief No. 4). Retrieved from https://zenodo.org/record/437928/files/DIVERCITIES-Policy-Brief-4-Living-with-Diversity.pdf?download=1
   Google Scholar
• Musterd, S., & Gritsai, O. (2010). Conditions for ‘creative knowledge cities’: Findings from a comparison between 13 European metropolises [‘Going creative’ - An option for all European cities?] (ACRE Report No. 9). Amsterdam. Retrieved from University of Amsterdam website: http://acre.socsci.uva.nl/results/documents/wp9-FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Nadin, V., & Stead, D. (2013). Opening up the compendium: An evaluation of international comparative planning research methodologies. European Planning Studies, 21(10), 1542–1561. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.722958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nijman, J. (2007). Introduction—comparative urbanism. Urban Geography, 28(1), 1–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.28.1.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nosek, Š. (2017). Territorial cohesion storylines in 2014–2020 cohesion policy. European Planning Studies, 25(12), 2157–2174. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1349079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oosterlynck, S., Novy, A., Kazepov, Y., Verschraegen, G., Saruis, T., Colombo, F., … Weinzierl, C. (2016). Towards a more effective governance of socially innovative policies – First insights from the case studies (ImPRovE Working Paper No. 16/11). Antwerp. Retrieved from Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy – University of Antwerp website: https://repository.uantwerpen.be/docman/irua/17f518/133037.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Oxley, M. (2001). Meaning, science, context and confusion in comparative housing research. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 16(1), 89–106. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011599006494
   Google Scholar
• Pierre, J. (2005). Comparative urban governance: Uncovering complex causalities. Urban Affairs Review, 40(4), 446–462. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087404273442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ragin, C. (2014). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press. Retrieved from https://gbv.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1698820
   Google Scholar
• Rau, H., Goggins, G., & Fahy, F. (2018). From invisibility to impact: Recognising the scientific and societal relevance of interdisciplinary sustainability research. Research Policy, 47(1), 266–276. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rink, D., Haase, A., & Bernt, M. (2009). Shrink smart WP1 paper D1-D3. Specification of working model: Shrink smart project. EU FP7 project ID 225193. Leipzig: Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ. Retrieved from https://www.ufz.de/export/data/400/39013_WP1_Paper_D1_D3_FINAL300909.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. (2016). Comparative urbanism: New geographies and cultures of theorizing the urban. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 40(1), 187–199. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12273
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. (n.d. (2016)). CITISPYCE final report: Part I (Deliverable No. 8.2). Birmingham. Retrieved from Aston University website: http://www.citispyce.eu/sites/default/files/CITISPYCE%20Final%20Report%20Part%20I%2022%20Feb16%20JR%20proofed.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sabato, S., & Verschraegen, G. (2016). The usage of EU resources in local social innovation (ImPRovE Working Paper No. 16/03). Antwerp. Retrieved from Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy – University of Antwerp website: https://repository.uantwerpen.be/docman/irua/a1c0eb/131336.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Scott, A., & Storper, M. (2015). The nature of cities: The scope and limits of urban theory. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39(1), 1–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12134
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294–308. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912907313077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sellers, J. (2005). Re-placing the nation: An agenda for comparative urban politics. Urban Affairs Review, 40(4), 419–445. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087404272673
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sykes, O. (2008). The importance of context and comparison in the study of European spatial planning. European Planning Studies, 16(4), 537–555. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310801983464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tasan-Kok, T., van Kempen, R., Raco, M., & Bolt, G. (2013). DIVERCITIES towards hyper-diversified European cities. A critical literature review: DIVERCITIES project. EU FP7 project ID 319970. Utrecht: Utrecht University, Faculty of Geosciences. Retrieved from https://www.urbandivercities.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/20140121_Towards_HyperDiversified_European_Cities.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tilly, C. (1984). Big structures, large processes, huge comparisons. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, J. (1992). Making the theoretical case. In C. C. Ragin & H. S. Becker (Eds.), What is a case?: Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 121–137). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ward, K. (2008). Editorial—toward a comparative (re)turn in urban studies? Some reflections. Urban Geography, 29(5), 405–410. doi: https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.29.5.405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward, K. (2010). Towards a relational comparative approach to the study of cities. Progress in Human Geography, 34(4), 471–487. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132509350239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warzywoda-Kruszyńska, W., Rokicka, E., Woźniak, W., Grotowska-Leder, J., Krzyszkowski, J., Matuchniak-Krasuska, A., … Kokoroskou, C. (2007). Final activity report [Project No. CIT2-CT-2004-506245; Project acronym: PROFIT; Project title: Policy responses Overcoming Factors in the Intergenerational Transmission of Inequalities]. Lodz. Retrieved from University of Lodz website: http://www.profit.uni.lodz.pl/pub/dok2/6ca34cbaf07ece58cbd1b4f24371c8c8/PROFIT_Final_activity_report+appendix.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. (2014). Applied social research methods series: Vol. 5. Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zaucha, J., & Böhme, K. (2019). Measuring territorial cohesion is not a mission impossible. European Planning Studies, 60(2), 1–23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1607827
   Google Scholar