trong states are those which are able to work their political agendas effectively, to make sure basic political tasks are completed. Strong states are able to defend their territory and interests, collect taxes from the people, enforce laws, manage their economies, and promote civil and political stability within their domain. Regardless of where authority is derived, the state has legitimacy to act because the citizens have accepted the terms of the social contract.

Weak states are those which are unable to perform basic political tasks, and unable to work the political agenda of the authority in charge. Weak states are typically unable to defend their territories and interests. They do not have enough legitimacy, or related logistics, to collect taxes, enforce their laws, and manage their economy effectively. Weak states also struggle with ensuring domestic stability, likely because they lack the legitimacy and authority to act on their constituents. Considering strong and weak states side-by-side, we can begin to discuss the concept of state capacity. Political capacity is defined as the ability of a state to use its power, as derived through authority and legitimacy, to get things done and promote its own interests. A state with low capacity is a weak state whereas a state with high capacity is a strong state. Capacity will be one of the factors comparativists consider when comparing states.

An important factor to consider for comparativists considering states is a states’ regime type. A regime is the method by which the state has chosen to wield its power to enforce laws, rules and norms of political life. Regime type and the form of government are therefore synonymous.