Navigating the Landscape of Party Archives: A Compass for Social Scientists Doing Comparative Party Archival Research

ABSTRACT Political parties play important roles in contemporary and historical contexts. With the digital turn in the humanities, historians and, increasingly, political scientists are turning to party archives for doing comparative analysis. Party archives provide unique insights on the role of party structures, actors, motivations, and discourses in real time. Yet despite their institutional and scholarly importance, comparative analysis is difficult given the heterogeneous landscape of party archives. This article aims to facilitate comparative analysis. We show that the establishment of different types of party archives follows distinct motivations before we link common obstacles (location, content, searchability, and usage) arising in comparative archival work to them. These obstacles’ severity is often connected to the type of archive, where personal and scholarly archives mark the extremes. The findings can help scholars gain deeper, broader, and, above all, comparable insights about political parties.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PS Political Science & Politics
Published
2026-02-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096526101887
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Navigating the Landscape of Party Archives: A Compass for Social Scientists Doing Comparative Party Archival Research

Ann‐Kristin Kölln, Anne Heyer
PS Political Science & Politics
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
article

Navigating the Landscape of Party Archives: A Compass for Social Scientists Doing Comparative Party Archival Research

Ann‐Kristin Kölln, Anne Heyer
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Political parties play important roles in contemporary and historical contexts. With the digital turn in the humanities, historians and, increasingly, political scientists are turning to party archives for doing comparative analysis. Party archives provide unique insights on the role of party structures, actors, motivations, and discourses in real time. Yet despite their institutional and scholarly importance, comparative analysis is difficult given the heterogeneous landscape of party archives. This article aims to facilitate comparative analysis. We show that the establishment of different types of party archives follows distinct motivations before we link common obstacles (location, content, searchability, and usage) arising in comparative archival work to them. These obstacles’ severity is often connected to the type of archive, where personal and scholarly archives mark the extremes. The findings can help scholars gain deeper, broader, and, above all, comparable insights about political parties.

PS Political Science & Politics
Leiden University (NL), University of Gothenburg (SE)
European Commission, Vetenskapsrådet, HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
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.