This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Taylor & Francis (Routledge) via the DOI in this record.The principal paradox of comparative public policy has remained over the years: there is no clear and broadly shared definition of the field. This article engages with the debate about what comparative public policy is from a distinctive perspective. Drawing from a systematic analysis of published research articles that maps out the usual comparative suspects, it reflects on what comparative public policy does and does not do in terms of comparative scope and country range, and the extent to which the limitations in the comparative scope matter for cumulative knowledge, theory building and the consolidation of the field. The article discusses different strategies to address the challenge of extending the range of comparative analysis.Canadian Social Science and Humanities Research CouncilUniversity of Ottaw
