• norsk
    • English
  • norsk 
    • norsk
    • English
  • Logg inn
Vis innførsel 
  •   Hjem
  • Chr. Michelsens Institutt
  • Publications
  • Vis innførsel
  •   Hjem
  • Chr. Michelsens Institutt
  • Publications
  • Vis innførsel
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

What does it mean to be poor? Investigating the qualitative-quantitative divide in Mozambique

Jones, Sam; Tvedten, Inge
Journal article, Peer reviewed
Thumbnail
Åpne
What does it mean to be poor? Investigating the qualitative-quantitative divide in Mozambique (543.8Kb)
Permanent lenke
http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2582921
Utgivelsesdato
2019-01-01
Metadata
Vis full innførsel
Samlinger
  • Publications [1313]
Originalversjon
in World Development vol. 117 pp. 153-166   10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.01.005
Sammendrag
Motivated by the siloed nature of much poverty research, as well as the challenge of finding inclusive operational definitions of poverty, this study reflects on the merits of seeking to reconcile economic (quantitative) and anthropological (qualitative) analytical approaches. Drawing on detailed evidence from Mozambique, we highlight fundamental philosophical tensions in poverty research along three main axes: social ontology (what is the form of social reality?); (b) epistemology (what can be known about poverty?); and (c) aetiology (how is poverty produced?). We argue the quantitative tradition is rooted in an atomistic view of the social world, which is allied to an etic epistemology in which causes and effects are treated as analytically separable. Anthropological work in Mozambique is anchored in an emic perspective, where the diverse forms of poverty are revealed through investigation of their generative mechanisms. This provides a view of poverty as a relational process of social marginalization and directs attention to the diversity of lived-experiences, as well as structural factors that limit individuals' agency. In clarifying their distinct philosophical commitments, we contend that a forced empirical marriage of the two approaches may be unhelpful. Instead, we recommend the virtues of each approach are leveraged toward genuine mutual dialogue.
Serie
World Development vol. 117

Kontakt oss | Gi tilbakemelding

Personvernerklæring
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Levert av  Unit
 

 

Bla i

Hele arkivetDelarkiv og samlingerUtgivelsesdatoForfattereTitlerEmneordDokumenttyperTidsskrifterDenne samlingenUtgivelsesdatoForfattereTitlerEmneordDokumenttyperTidsskrifter

Min side

Logg inn

Statistikk

Besøksstatistikk

Kontakt oss | Gi tilbakemelding

Personvernerklæring
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Levert av  Unit