The two-step approach

The two-step approach (Schneider and Wagemann 2006; Schneider 2008) is based on the idea that often in comparative social science research endeavors, “conditions … can be divided into two groups, which can be labeled ‘remote’ and ‘proximate’ factors” (Schneider and Wagemann 2006: 759; see also Kitschelt 2003). Remoteness and proximity can be defined along various dimensions. For instance, remote factors are relatively stable over time. Also, their origin is often remote from the outcome to be explained on the space and time dimensions. As a consequence, remote factors cannot usually be easily altered by actors and are treated as exogenously given. In many research settings, remote factors are adequately labeled structural factors, contexts, historical legacies, etc. Proximate factors, by contrast, vary over time and originate not so far back in the past. They can be relatively easily modified by actors; often, they even describe human action itself. Remoteness and proximity can thus be interpreted not only in terms of space and time, but also with regard to the causal closeness which they are assumed to have.

Two-step thinking is of course not exclusive to QCA. Many sub-disciplines of the social sciences refer to causal processes (proximate factors) which unfold within certain contexts (re mote factors). Kitschelt ( 1999 ), for instance, argues that explanations that rely exclusively on remote (structural) factors provide for causal depth, but fall short of demonstrating the causal mechanisms that link deep, distant causes with an outcome. By contrast, explanations based on proximate factors display causal mechanisms (often, but not necessarily, at the micro-level). Consequently, a good causal statement consists of finding the right balance between the two core features: causal depth and causal mechanisms (Schneider and Wagemann 2006 : 761f.).