Modular Comparisons: Grounding and Gauging Southeast Asian Governance

This paper argues that analytical tensions between comparability and distinctiveness, which often drive a wedge between disciplinary and area-studies debates, are not irreconcilable. Drawing on original research of public governance in Southeast Asia, I contend that modular comparisons—which blend different levels of analytical scope and abstraction—offer a valuable methodological instrument for cross-fertilizing empirical depth and breadth. To showcase modular comparisons in practice, I present four interconnected studies of public governance in Southeast Asia. The analysis combines in-depth city-level analyses and subnational cross-sections (that draw heavily on Indonesia’s multilevel governance experience) with an intraregional governance comparison (that expands the focus towards the Philippines and Thailand). To shed further light on “what makes governments work,” the discussion traverses micro/macro-level confines and within-case/cross-case boundaries. In doing so, the concept of modular comparisons provides a systematic and contextually grounded perspective on Southeast Asian governance and a means for narrowing prevailing area-discipline divides.

模塊化比較：東南亞治理的理論扎根及度量

本論文提出，可比較性與特異性之間的分析張力通常會在有關學科化研究和區域研究的爭論中引發矛盾，但兩者其實並非不可通約。借助於東南亞公共治理方面的第一手研究，我主張進行模塊比較，認為它通過混合不同的分析范圍和抽象化層次，為經驗研究在深度和廣度上有效地地交叉互動提供了有價值的方法論工具。為實際展示何為模塊比較， 我探討了東南亞公共治理方面四個相互關聯的研究。這一分析結合了在城市層次進行的深度分析與在次國家層次進行的跨部門比較（大量借助了印度尼西亞多層次治理經驗）及區域內治理之比較（將分析重點拓展至菲律賓和泰國）。為進一步闡明“政府是何以成功運作的”，本文跨越宏-微觀框架分野進行探討，也打破了個案內部-跨案例分析之間的邊界。通過這種方式, 模塊比較這一概念為東南亞治理提供了一個系統化並且深深植根於語境之中的研究視野，並為克服區域研究–學科研究的普遍分立狀態提供了一個途徑。

Translated from English by Li Guo