IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cudawp/127034.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Epistemology, Normative Theory and Poverty Analysis:Implications for Q-Squared in Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Kanbur, Ravi
  • Shaffer, Paul

Abstract

The turn to the use of mixed qualitative and quantitative (Q-Squared) methods in the analysis of poverty is a welcome development with large potential payoffs. While the benefits of mixing are not in doubt, the tensions involved in so doing have not received adequate attention. The aim of this paper is to address this gap in the “Q-Squared” literature. It argues that there are important differences between approaches to poverty which operate at the levels of epistemology and normative theory. These differences have implications for the numerical transformation of data, the selection of validity criteria, and the conception/dimension of poverty adopted and interpersonal comparisons of well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanbur, Ravi & Shaffer, Paul, 2006. "Epistemology, Normative Theory and Poverty Analysis:Implications for Q-Squared in Practice," Working Papers 127034, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:127034
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.127034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/127034/files/Cornell_Dyson_wp0602.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.127034?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carvalho, S. & White, H., 1997. "Combining the Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Poverty Measurement and Analysis. The Practice and the Potential," Papers 366, World Bank - Technical Papers.
    2. Unknown, 2005. "Forward," 2005 Conference: Slovenia in the EU - Challenges for Agriculture, Food Science and Rural Affairs, November 10-11, 2005, Moravske Toplice, Slovenia 183804, Slovenian Association of Agricultural Economists (DAES).
    3. Lipton, Michael, 1992. "Economics and anthropology: Grounding models in relationships," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 1541-1546, October.
    4. Howard White, 2005. "Combining the Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Poverty Measurement and Analysis," Development and Comp Systems 0505003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. David Mosse, 1994. "Authority, Gender and Knowledge: Theoretical Reflections on the Practice of Participatory Rural Appraisal," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 25(3), pages 497-526, July.
    6. Ravallion, Martin, 1996. "Issues in Measuring and Modelling Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(438), pages 1328-1343, September.
    7. Paul Shaffer, 2002. "Poverty Naturalized: Implications for Gender," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 55-75.
    8. Harriss, John, 2002. "The Case for Cross-Disciplinary Approaches in International Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 487-496, March.
    9. Philippa Bevan & Sandra Fullerton Joireman, 1997. "The perils of measuring poverty: Identifying the 'poor' in rural Ethiopia," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 315-343.
    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 127148, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    11. Sendhil Mullainathan & Marianne Bertrand, 2001. "Do People Mean What They Say? Implications for Subjective Survey Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 67-72, May.
    12. Shaffer, Paul, 1998. "Gender, poverty and deprivation: Evidence from the Republic of Guinea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(12), pages 2119-2135, December.
    13. Ravallion, Martin & Lokshin, Michael, 2003. "On the utility consistency of poverty lines," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3157, The World Bank.
    14. White, Howard, 2002. "Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in Poverty Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 511-522, March.
    15. Samuelson, Paul A, 1974. "Complementarity-An Essay on the 40th Anniversary of the Hicks-Allen Revolution in Demand Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1255-1289, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pranab Bardhan & Isha Ray, 2008. "Methodological Approaches in Economics and Anthropology," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & Wilfred Dolfsma (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Social Economics, chapter 24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Bardhan, Pranab & Ray, Isha, 2006. "Symposium on Anthropologists' Views on Common Resources: Methodological Approaches to the Question of the Commons," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(3), pages 655-676, April.
    3. Juan José García del Hoyo & Celeste Jiménez de Madariaga, 2015. "Teorías del valor: coincidencias y divergencias en la economía y la antropología social," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 17(33), pages 109-131, July-Dece.
    4. Shaffer, Paul & Kanbur, Ravi & Hang, Nguyen Thu & Aryeetey, Ellen Bortei-Doku, 2009. "Q-Squared in Policy: The Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods of Poverty Analysis in Decision-Making," Working Papers 48919, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    5. Nicola Jones & Andy Sumner, 2009. "Does Mixed Methods Research Matter to Understanding Childhood Well-Being?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 33-50, January.
    6. Shaffer, Paul, 2013. "Ten Years of “Q-Squared”: Implications for Understanding and Explaining Poverty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 269-285.
    7. David Hulme & University of Manchester, 2006. "Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research for Country Case Studies of Development," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-063, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    8. Lawrence Sáez, 2013. "Methods in governance research: a review of research approaches," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-017-13, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    9. Michael Tribe & Andrew Sumner, 2006. "Development economics at a crossroads? Introduction to a policy arena," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(7), pages 957-966.
    10. Jean-Pierre Lachaud, 1998. "Modélisation des déterminants de la pauvreté et marché du travail en Afrique : le cas du Burkina Faso," Documents de travail 32, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    11. David Hulme & John Toye, 2006. "The case for cross-disciplinary social science research on poverty, inequality and well-being," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(7), pages 1085-1107.
    12. John Toye & David Hulme & University of Manchester, 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.
    13. Sharp, Kay, 2007. "Squaring the "Q"s? Methodological Reflections on a Study of Destitution in Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 264-280, February.
    14. Kirsten, J, 2002. "Forty Years Of Agricultural Economics Scholarship And Practice In South Africa: A Time To Challenge The Consensus And Refocus Our Intellectual Work," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 41(4).
    15. Andrew Sumner, 2010. "Economic Well-being and Non-economic Well-being: A Review of the Meaning and Measurement of Poverty," Working Papers id:3268, eSocialSciences.
    16. Mert Bilgin, 2012. "The PEARL Model of Sustainable Development," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 107(1), pages 19-35, May.
    17. Place, Frank & Adato, Michelle & Hebinck, Paul, 2007. "Understanding Rural Poverty and Investment in Agriculture: An Assessment of Integrated Quantitative and Qualitative Research in Western Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 312-325, February.
    18. Christian Romer Løvendal & Marco Knowles & Naoko Horii, 2004. "Understanding Vulnerability to Food Insecurity Lessons from Vulnerable Livelihood Profiling," Working Papers 04-18, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    19. Kanbur, Ravi, 2002. "Economics, Social Science and Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 477-486, March.
    20. Radeny, Maren & van den Berg, Marrit & Schipper, Rob, 2012. "Rural Poverty Dynamics in Kenya: Structural Declines and Stochastic Escapes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1577-1593.

    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:ags:cudawp:127034. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dacorus.html .

    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.