Urban Ethnography Reading Group #2

What is comparative ethnography? 

For our biweekly reading group on urban ethnography, we read about comparative ethnography. It is particularly relevant for us as our project involves our three doctoral researchers conducting simultaneous ethnographic fieldwork in Kyoto, Rotterdam, and Palermo. 

We read chapters from “Beyond the case: The Logics and Practices of Comparative Ethnography”, by Corey M. Abramson and Neil Gong, which highlighted the challenges and potentials of ethnographic diversity for comparative approaches; and “The case for comparative ethnography” by Erica S. Simmons and Nicholas Rush Smith, which explored different ways and levels to which conduct comparative ethnography. 

These led to a fruitful discussion on how to handle the diversity of our approaches and sites, especially given that our research will be not only comparative, but also collaborative. How to write fieldnotes that are palpable and understandable for someone that is not on the site? How to retain both the specificity and spontaneousness of the field, and comparability across fields?   

Moreover, prompted by Simmons and Smith’s paper, we discussed what our units of comparison will be: in line with our strategic action field (SAF) approach, our focus will be on the field and the relations and processes within and across it.  

***

Abramson, C. M., & Gong, N. (2020). Beyond the case: the logics and practices of comparative ethnography. Oxford University Press.

Simmons, E. S., & Smith, N. R. (2019). The case for comparative ethnography. Comparative Politics, 51(3), 341-359.