Can the Tensions between Generalization and Singularity Be Resolved by Comparative Writing?

This article is an attempt to understand how the dilemma between theoretical generalization and the recognition of the idiosyncratic nature of cases might be (partially) resolved during the writing phase of comparative research. Reflecting on comparative research work on environmental policies in four French and British cities, this article will question writing strategies in urban studies literature. It will explore the possibility of a rise of the monograph as the favored way to write research results in urban studies and its replacement by a term-to-term-oriented writing of the comparison. Several writing tips from temporary monographs—emphasis is placed on process rather than causal effects, etc.—will be provided in order to neutralize the “crushing” of the richness of the case.