Who counts? Challenges and biases in defining ‘households’ in research on poverty
Who counts? Challenges and biases in defining ‘households’ in research on poverty
复制标题
贫困研究中定义“家庭”的挑战和偏见是谁最重要的？
DOI：
10.1080/19439342.2015.1068358
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
Carlos Oya
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carlos Oya
在2002年发表的一篇重要文章中，H.白色提出了在贫困分析中采用混合方法的理由，并解决了数量和质量方法之间传统对立所产生的一些难题。其中一个例子是家庭规模与贫穷之间的关系以及家庭规模经济的相关概念。本文回顾了这场辩论，并更新了关于在调查和人口普查中使用和滥用“住户”的新贡献，特别是在定量研究设计中。事实上，在改进定量调查设计处理“住户”的方式和学习定性方法方面，特别是在贫穷的农业背景下，还有很大的余地。一些替代办法的家庭和抽样决定的调查设计贫困和劳动力研究的建议，其优点和缺点进行了简要讨论。
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.