Decoding populism’s ambiguity and causal complexity: A qualitative comparative analysis of Central and Eastern Europe

Abstract

The increasingly active academic debate on populism is a reflection of its relevance as a political and social reality. Significant efforts have been devoted to understanding what it is, leading to multiple definitions, and explaining how it comes about, producing various theories. Despite its contributions, this body of work shows scarce comparative research, which is necessary to improve both accounts. To address this situation, the use of fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis is proposed here, based on the current standards of practice. While fuzzy sets can prove useful to grasp populism’s ambiguity, qualitative comparative analysis can facilitate the study of the multiple pathways leading to populist rhetoric. Building on the literature, Central and Eastern Europe’s experience is studied as an illustration and two pathways are identified: (i) the non-institutional, (ii) the polarized non-institutional. These findings bring nuance to established insights. This approach can prove useful to elucidate the debate as it is applicable to various definitions of populism and causal theories.