Identifying Relevant Cases of Conversion and Drift Using the Comparative Agendas Project

One of the most important phases of case-oriented research is identifying the relevant population of cases. The best practice scheme suggests first identifying the positive and then the negative cases, based on the assumption that the population is small and known. This scheme is inapplicable when the population is unknown, as is the case with many public administration and public policy outcomes, which are often less visible. However, most research either ignores this difficulty or recommends a single case study. This article suggests that when the population is unknown scholars can apply the possibility principle to identify the relevant population of cases. In order to do so, a large dataset is required. In policy studies, the Comparative Agendas Project (CAP) can serve this aim. This article highlights CAP's applicability for case selection based on the possibility principle in two less visible policy outcomes: conversion and drift. In that, it not only addresses an overlooked challenge but also promotes both CAP as a useful tool for qualitative researchers and the expansion of comparative work on conversion and drift.