IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v42y1996i3p313-324.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Limitations of quantitative research in the study of structural adjustment

Author

Listed:
  • Lundy, Patricia

Abstract

Sociologists and, more recently, critical medical anthropologists have been arguing for a refocusing of the analysis of health and health care towards a perspective which considers the broader global political economy. In the context of the debt crisis and IMF/World Bank-inspired structural adjustment policies, the political economy theoretical perspective is becoming even more relevant in the analysis of health underdevelopment in many 'Third World' countries. This study focuses on the direct and indirect effects of the Jamaican debt crisis and structural adjustment programmes on health care services and health standards. In this paper it is argued that there are methodological problems using quantitative data when studying the effects of structural adjustment. In addition to providing a limited account of the effects, it is argued that the basic problem is a matter of the availability and reliability of the quantitative data in many 'Third World' countries. It is argued that some of these problems could be overcome by the application of qualitative micro-level analysis. This type of methodology is important to ascertain the effects of global processes at the grass roots level and to gain insights into what those working in the health sector are experiencing and what they perceive as the effects, if any, of structural adjustment policies. This has often been missing from the impersonal accounts offered by quantitative research on the subject to date.

Suggested Citation

  • Lundy, Patricia, 1996. "Limitations of quantitative research in the study of structural adjustment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 313-324, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:42:y:1996:i:3:p:313-324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(95)00153-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:42:y:1996:i:3:p:313-324. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.