Global ethnographic comparison

Sociologists are increasingly using comparative ethnographic research to examine how the interplay of global and local forces shape an array of social phenomena. However, there has yet been little examination of the distinct logics, challenges, and advantages of engaging in global ethnographic comparison (GEC). This special issue remedies that lacuna by bringing together seven studies that not only take different approaches to GEC but also explicitly reflect on key methodological and practical questions arising from this kind of research. Our introductory essay frames these studies in three ways. First, we trace the roots of GEC in earlier approaches to global ethnography and macrohistorical comparison and delineate the field of global ethnographic comparison as it currently exists. Second, using the articles in this issue along with other recent examples, we develop a typology of GECs along two dimensions: the procedural order in which they are constructed, and the rationale for comparison that drives them. Finally, we consider how different approaches to GEC can shed light on key global processes in the 21st century, from the post-2008 dynamics of late neoliberalism to the current conjuncture marked by global pandemics, ecological crises, and ascendant right-wing populisms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Comparative Sociology
Published
2026-02-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00207152261417242
Primary Topic
Globalization and political ideologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Global ethnographic comparison

Carlos F. Bustamante, Carter Koppelman
International Journal of Comparative Sociology
Globalization and political ideologies
article

Global ethnographic comparison

Carlos F. Bustamante, Carter Koppelman
article en

Abstract

Sociologists are increasingly using comparative ethnographic research to examine how the interplay of global and local forces shape an array of social phenomena. However, there has yet been little examination of the distinct logics, challenges, and advantages of engaging in global ethnographic comparison (GEC). This special issue remedies that lacuna by bringing together seven studies that not only take different approaches to GEC but also explicitly reflect on key methodological and practical questions arising from this kind of research. Our introductory essay frames these studies in three ways. First, we trace the roots of GEC in earlier approaches to global ethnography and macrohistorical comparison and delineate the field of global ethnographic comparison as it currently exists. Second, using the articles in this issue along with other recent examples, we develop a typology of GECs along two dimensions: the procedural order in which they are constructed, and the rationale for comparison that drives them. Finally, we consider how different approaches to GEC can shed light on key global processes in the 21st century, from the post-2008 dynamics of late neoliberalism to the current conjuncture marked by global pandemics, ecological crises, and ascendant right-wing populisms.

International Journal of Comparative Sociology
George Washington University (US), London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Globalization and political ideologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.