IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jdevef/v7y2015i3p336-345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who counts? Challenges and biases in defining 'households' in research on poverty

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Oya

Abstract

In an important article published in 2002, H. White made a case for mixed methods in poverty analysis and addressed a number of puzzles arising from conventional oppositions between quantitative and qualitative approaches. One of the examples was the relationship between household size and poverty and the related notion of household economies of scale. This paper revisits this debate and updates it with new contributions on the use and misuse of the 'household' in surveys and censuses, particularly in quantitative research designs. Indeed, there is much scope for improving the way quantitative survey designs treat the 'household' and for learning from qualitative approaches, especially in poor agrarian contexts. Some alternative approaches to the household and to sampling decisions in survey design for poverty and labour studies are proposed and their advantages and disadvantages briefly discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Oya, 2015. "Who counts? Challenges and biases in defining 'households' in research on poverty," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 336-345, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jdevef:v:7:y:2015:i:3:p:336-345
    DOI: 10.1080/19439342.2015.1068358
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/19439342.2015.1068358
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/19439342.2015.1068358?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cuccaro-Alamin, Stephanie & Eastman, Andrea Lane & Foust, Regan & McCroskey, Jacquelyn & Nghiem, Huy Tran & Putnam-Hornstein, Emily, 2021. "Strategies for constructing household and family units with linked administrative records," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jdevef:v:7:y:2015:i:3:p:336-345. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJDE20 .

    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.