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

Combining the Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Poverty Measurement and Analysis


Author Info

  • Howard White

    (Institute of Development Studies)


This paper highlights the key characteristics of the quantitative and qualitative approaches to poverty measurement and analysis, examines the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, and analyzes the potential for combining the two approaches in analytical work on poverty. The main conclusion of this paper is that sole reliance on either only the quantitative approach or only the qualitative approach in measuring and analyzing poverty is often likely to be less desirable than combining the two approaches. This is because there are limits to a purely quantitative approach as well as a purely qualitative approach to poverty measurement and analysis. Each approach has an appropriate time and place, but in most cases both approaches will generally be required to address different aspects of a problem and to answer questions which the other approach cannot answer as well or cannot answer at all. The need to combine the two approaches in analytical work on poverty cannot be overemphasized. There are three key ways to combine the quantitative and qualitative approaches: (i) integrating methodologies; (ii) confirming, refuting, enriching, and explaining the findings of one approach with those of the other; and (iii) merging the findings of the two approaches into one set of policy recommendations. Some ways in which the integration of methodologies can be achieved are: using quantitative survey data to determine the individuals/communities to be studied through the qualitative approach; using the quantitative survey to design the interview guide of the qualitative survey; using qualitative work to determine stratification of the quantitative sample; using qualitative work to determine the design of the quantitative survey questionnaire; using qualitative work to pretest the quantitative survey questionnaire; and/or using qualitative analyses to refine the poverty index. 'Confirming' or 'refuting' are achieved by verifying quantitative results through the qualitative approach. 'Enriching' is achieved by using qualitative work to identify issues or obtain information on variables not obtained by quantitative surveys. 'Examining' refers to generating hypothesis from qualitative work for testing through the quantitative approach. 'Explaining' involves using qualitative work to understand unanticipated results from quantitative data. In principle, each of these mechanisms may operate in either direction -- from qualitative to quantitative approaches or vice versa. 'Merging' involves analyzing the information provided both by the quantitative approach as well as the qualitative approach to derive one set of policy recommendations. The quantitative and qualitative approaches are being increasingly combined in analytical work on poverty, but there remains scope for further strengthening the links between them.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Development and Comp Systems with number 0505003.

as in new window
Length: 42 pages
Date of creation: 03 May 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:0505003

Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 42
Contact details of provider:
Web page:

Related research

Keywords: Poverty; qualitative approaches; mixed methods; PRA;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


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. Narayan, D., 1996. "Toward Participatory Research," Papers, World Bank - Technical Papers 307, World Bank - Technical Papers.
  2. Hentschel, J. & Lanjouw, P., 1996. "Constructing an Indicator of Consumption for the Analysis of Poverty. Principles and Illustrations with Reference to Ecuador," Papers, World Bank - Living Standards Measurement 127, World Bank - Living Standards Measurement.
  3. Ravallion, Martin, 1996. "How Well Can Method Substitute for Data? Five Experiments in Poverty Analysis," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, World Bank Group, vol. 11(2), pages 199-221, August.
  4. Ravallion, Martin & Datt, Gaurav & van de Walle, Dominique, 1991. "Quantifying Absolute Poverty in the Developing World," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 37(4), pages 345-61, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

Cited by:
  1. Christine Griffin & Laura Camfield, 2009. "Using Qualitative Methods with Poor Children in Urban Ethiopia: Opportunities & Challenges," Social Indicators Research, Springer, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 73-87, January.
  2. Ruth Alsop & Mette Bertelsen & Jeremy Holland, 2006. "Empowerment in Practice : From Analysis to Implementation," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 6980, August.
  3. 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.
  4. David Hulme, 2006. "Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research for Country Case Studies of Development," Economics Series Working Papers, University of Oxford, Department of Economics GPRG-WPS-063, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  5. Mert Bilgin, 2012. "The PEARL Model of Sustainable Development," Social Indicators Research, Springer, Springer, vol. 107(1), pages 19-35, May.
  6. Sabina Alkire, 2005. "Subjective Quantitative Studies of Human Agency," Social Indicators Research, Springer, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 217-260, October.
  7. David Crosoer & Murray Leibbrandt & Ingrid Woolard, 2005. "Asset-based versus money metric poverty indices in South Africa: An assessment using the Chronic Poverty Research Centre RSA 2002 Survey," SALDRU/CSSR Working Papers, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town 109, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
  8. Dariush Hayati & Ezatollah Karami & Bill Slee, 2006. "Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in the Measurement of Rural Poverty: The Case of Iran," Social Indicators Research, Springer, Springer, vol. 75(3), pages 361-394, 02.
  9. Kanbur, Ravi & Shaffer, Paul, 2007. "Epistemology, Normative Theory and Poverty Analysis: Implications for Q-Squared in Practice," World Development, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 183-196, February.
  10. Laura Camfield & Gina Crivello & Martin Woodhead, 2009. "Wellbeing Research in Developing Countries: Reviewing the Role of Qualitative Methods," Social Indicators Research, Springer, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 5-31, January.
  11. Kanbur, Ravi, 2009. "Poverty and Distribution: Twenty Years Ago and Now," Working Papers, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management 48918, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.


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


Access and download statistics


When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:0505003. 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: (EconWPA).

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.