Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Economics, Social Science and Development

Contents:

Author Info

  • Kanbur, Ravi

Abstract

Development economics nowadays is mainstream economics applied to poor countries. An examination of the core principles of mainstream economics reveals tremendous strengths, but also tremendous weaknesses. Other disciplines, such as sociology, anthropology and political science, have complementary strengths that suggest a role for them as equal partners in development studies and policy. The argument for a partnership of disciplines is logical and strong. But cross-disciplinarity is not easy in practice. It is best achieved through concrete exercises which demonstrate exactly how “two disciplines are better than one” when analyzing specific policy issues in development.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/127666
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management in its series Working Papers with number 127666.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:127666

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Warren Hall, Ithaca NY 14853
Fax: 607-255-9984
Web page: http://aem.cornell.edu/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: International Development;

Other versions of this item:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Harriss, John, 2002. "The Case for Cross-Disciplinary Approaches in International Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 487-496, March.
  2. White, Howard, 2002. "Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in Poverty Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 511-522, March.
  3. Alderman, Harold, et al, 1995. "Unitary versus Collective Models of the Household: Is It Time to Shift the Burden of Proof?," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, World Bank Group, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, February.
  4. T. N. Srinivasan & Jagdish Bhagwati, 1999. "Outward-Orientation and Development: Are Revisionists Right," Working Papers, Economic Growth Center, Yale University 806, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
  5. Folbre, Nancy, 1986. "Hearts and spades: Paradigms of household economics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 245-255, February.
  6. Chiappori, Pierre-Andre & Haddad, Lawrence & Hoddinott, John & Kanbur, Ravi, 1993. "Unitary versus collective models of the household : time to shift theburden of proof?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1217, The World Bank.
  7. George A. Akerlof & Rachel E. Kranton, 2000. "Economics And Identity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 115(3), pages 715-753, August.
  8. Kanbur, Ravi, 2001. "Economic Policy, Distribution and Poverty: The Nature of Disagreements," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 1083-1094, June.
  9. Jackson, Cecile, 2002. "Disciplining Gender?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 497-509, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Wendy Olsen, 2005. "Pluralism, Poverty and Sharecropping: Cultivating Open-Mindedness in Development Studies," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-008, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  2. Svedberg, Peter, 2003. "World Income Distribution: Which Way?," Seminar Papers, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic Studies 724, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic Studies.
  3. John Toye & David Hulme, 2005. "The case for cross-disciplinary social science research on poverty, inequality and well-being," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-001, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  4. Kimberly Ann. Elliott & Debayani Kar & J. David Richardson, 2004. "Assessing Globalization’s Critics: “Talkers Are No Good Doers?”," NBER Chapters, in: Challenges to Globalization: Analyzing the Economics, pages 17-62 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Arup Maharatna, 2008. "Development of What? An Exposition of the Politics of Development Economics," Working Papers id:1819, eSocialSciences.
  6. Wendy Olsen, 2008. "Pluralism, Tenancy and Poverty: Cultivating Open-Mindedness in Poverty Studies," Working Papers id:1684, eSocialSciences.
  7. Kanbur, Ravi, 2013. "Exposure and Dialogue Programs in the Training of Development Analysts and Practitioners," Working Papers, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management 180097, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
  8. Emma Aisbett, 2005. "Why are the Critics so Convinced that Globalization is Bad for the Poor?," NBER Working Papers 11066, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Shaffer, Paul, 2013. "Ten Years of “Q-Squared”: Implications for Understanding and Explaining Poverty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 269-285.
  10. Kanbur, Ravi & Riles, Annelise, 2004. "And Never the Twain Shall Meet? An Exchange on the Strengths and Weaknesses of Anthropology and Economics in Analyzing the Commons," Working Papers, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management 127148, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
  11. Barrett, Christopher B., 2003. "The Economics Of Poverty And The Poverty Of Economics: A Christian Perspective," Working Papers, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management 14747, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
  12. Nicola Jones & Andy Sumner, 2009. "Does Mixed Methods Research Matter to Understanding Childhood Well-Being?," Social Indicators Research, Springer, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 33-50, January.
  13. Fine, Ben, 2002. "Economics Imperialism and the New Development Economics as Kuhnian Paradigm Shift?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 2057-2070, December.
  14. Stefano Ponte, 2008. "Developing a ‘Vertical’ Dimension to Chronic Poverty Research: Some Lessons from Global Value Chain Analysis," Working Papers id:1743, eSocialSciences.
  15. Ramón E. López & Eugenio Figueroa B. & Pablo Gutiérrez C., 2013. "La ‘parte del león’: Nuevas estimaciones de la participación de los súper ricos en el ingreso de Chile," Working Papers, University of Chile, Department of Economics wp379, University of Chile, Department of Economics.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:127666. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.