IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cudawp/127666.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economics, Social Science and Development

Author

Listed:
  • 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanbur, Ravi, "undated". "Economics, Social Science and Development," Working Papers 127666, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:127666
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.127666
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/127666/files/Cornell_Dyson_wp0119.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.127666?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. Harriss, John, 2002. "The Case for Cross-Disciplinary Approaches in International Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 487-496, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Alderman, Harold, et al, 1995. "Unitary versus Collective Models of the Household: Is It Time to Shift the Burden of Proof?," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, February.
    4. A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), 2000. "Handbook of Income Distribution," Handbook of Income Distribution, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    5. Kanbur Ravi, 2001. "Economic Policy, Distribution and Poverty: The Nature of Disagreements," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(2), pages 122-145, April.
    6. T. N. Srinivasan & Jagdish Bhagwati, 2001. "Outward-Orientation and Development: Are Revisionists Right?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Deepak Lal & Richard H. Snape (ed.), Trade, Development and Political Economy, chapter 1, pages 3-26, Palgrave Macmillan.
    7. White, Howard, 2002. "Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in Poverty Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 511-522, March.
    8. Folbre, Nancy, 1986. "Hearts and spades: Paradigms of household economics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 245-255, February.
    9. George A. Akerlof & Rachel E. Kranton, 2000. "Economics and Identity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 715-753.
    10. 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)

    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. 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.
    2. Rew, Alan & Khan, Shahzad & Rew, Martin, 2007. ""P3 > Q2" in Northern Orissa: An Example of Integrating "Combined Methods" (Q2) Through a "Platform for Probing Poverties" (P3)," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 281-295, February.
    3. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Robert Pollak, 2003. "Gary Becker's Contributions to Family and Household Economics," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 111-141, January.
    6. Frederic Vermeulen, 2002. "Collective Household Models: Principles and Main Results," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 533-564, September.
    7. Yoosik Youm & Edward O. Laumann, "undated". "Toward resolving the puzzle of the household division of labor: The role of trust in specifying neoclassical economic, power-dependency, and sex-role attitude explanations," University of Chicago - Population Research Center 2000-05, Chicago - Population Research Center.
    8. Fine, Ben, 2002. "Economics Imperialism and the New Development Economics as Kuhnian Paradigm Shift?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 2057-2070, December.
    9. Sonia Laszlo, 2005. "Self-employment earnings and returns to education in rural Peru," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(7), pages 1247-1287.
    10. Kristian Orsini & Amadéo Spadaro, 2005. "Sharing resources within the household: a multi-country microsimulation analysis of the determinants of intrahousehold "strategic weight" differentials and their distributional outcomes," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590860, HAL.
    11. Cagatay, Nilufer & Elson, Diane & Grow, Caren, 1995. "Introduction," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(11), pages 1827-1836, November.
    12. Grusky, David & Kanbur, Ravi, 2004. "CONCEPTUAL FERMENT IN POVERTY AND INEQUALITY: The View from Economics and Sociology," Working Papers 127149, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    13. Maggs, Philip & Hoddinott, John, 1999. "The impact of changes in common property resource management on intrahousehold allocation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 317-324, May.
    14. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al‐Nowaihi, 2021. "Identity and Redistribution: Theory and Evidence," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 499-531, April.
    15. M. Fafchamps & A. R. Quisumbing, 2002. "Control and Ownership of Assets Within Rural Ethiopian Households," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 47-82.
    16. Nazia Mansoor, 2011. "Marriage payments and bargaining power of women in rural Bangladesh," Studies in Economics 1119, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    17. 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.
    18. Jo Thori Lind, 2001. "Tout est au mieux dans ce meilleur des ménages possibles The Pangloss critique of equivalence scales," Discussion Papers 296, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    19. Hoddinott, John F., 1997. "Water, health, and income: a review," FCND discussion papers 25, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Jaime Andrés Sarmiento Espinel, 2012. "Parental investment in their children’s education," Serie documentos de trabajo del Centro de Estudios Económicos 2012-09, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:cudawp:127666. 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.