Conclusion case studies as evidence

Lessons learned

Daniel Druckman, Amrita Narlikar

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter


The chapters in this book address a set of hypotheses about sources of deadlocks with a variety of disciplinary and case-study analyses. The result is a rich corpus of insights about how deadlocks may occur and possible ways to exit them. The insights include both those that address the hypotheses (a form of deduction) and those that are relevant to other processes observed to operate in the cases (a form of induction). These dual products are important contributions to the literatures on multilateral negotiation and conflict settlement/resolution. They emerge from diverse settings and issue areas, take circumstances into account, and illuminate the way several hypothesised structures and processes interact: they bolster arguments for generalizability, reinforce contingency theories of conflict, and highlight synergies among the hypothesised processes. But, the approach also raises a question about whether cases provide an adequate evaluation of competing hypotheses. This issue is discussed in the following section. Theory and case studies. This book is the most recent of a stream of negotiation studies referred to as analytical (or enhanced) case studies. The approach is based on the idea that cases can be understood through the lens of theoretical concepts or propositions. Earlier studies based on this approach have highlighted either structural/cultural or process influences on negotiation outcomes. The former connect to our Hypotheses 3, 4 and 6.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationDeadlocks in multilateral negotiations
Subtitle of host publicationCauses and solutions
EditorsAmrita Narlikar
Place of PublicationCambridge, UK; New York
PublisherCambridge University Press
Number of pages26
ISBN (Electronic)9780511804809
ISBN (Print)9780521113748, 9780521130677
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Conclusion case studies as evidence: Lessons learned'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Druckman, D., & Narlikar, A. (2010). Conclusion case studies as evidence: Lessons learned. In A. Narlikar (Ed.), Deadlocks in multilateral negotiations: Causes and solutions (pp. 254-279). Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.