Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal: Some Questions ?· BRIDGING QUANTITATIVE-QUALITATIVE…

  • View
    213

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

QUAL-QUANT

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE POVERTY APPRAISAL: COMPLEMENTARITIES, TENSIONS AND THE WAY FORWARD

Contributions

to A Workshop Held At

Cornell University March 15-16, 2001

Contributors* Ravi Kanbur (Editor) Robert Chambers Patti Petesch Norman Uphoff Martin Ravallion Francois Bourguignon David Sahn Caroline Moser Christopher Barrett David Booth Vijayendra Rao Luc Christiaensen Jesko Hentschel Paul Shaffer Rosemary McGee Ronald Herring Gary Fields Alex Wilks Erik Thorbecke

* The contributors would like to thank the Poverty, Inequality and Development Initiative at Cornell University and the MacArthur Foundation for financial support, and Joyce Knuutila and Leonid Fedorov for their excellent organizational assistance.

CONTENTS

CONFERENCE PROGRAM AND PARTICIPANTS i

Q-SQUARED? A COMMENTARY ON QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE POVERTY APPRAISAL Ravi Kanbur 1

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE POVERTY APPRAISAL: THE STATE OF PLAY AND SOME QUESTIONS Ravi Kanbur 17

QUALITATIVE APPROACHES: SELF CRITICISM AND WHAT CAN BE GAINED FROM QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES Robert Chambers 22

THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS? Robert Chambers 26

SELF-CRITICISM AND OBSERVATIONS ON THE WAY TO FINISHING VOICES OF THE POOR: FROM MANY LANDS Patti Petesch 30

BRIDGING QUANTITATIVE-QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN POVERTY APPRAISAL: SELF-CRITICAL THOUGHTS ON QUALITATIVE APPROACHES Norman Uphoff 33

CAN QUALITATIVE METHODS HELP QUANTITATIVE POVERTY MEASUREMENT? Martin Ravallion 38

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO POVERTY ANALYSIS: TWO PICTURES OF THE SAME MOUNTAIN? Francois Bourguignon 44

STRENGTHENING QUANTITATIVE METHODS THROUGH INCORPORATING QUALITATIVE INFORMATION David E. Sahn 47

APT ILLUSTRATION OR ANECDOTAL INFORMATION? CAN QUALITATIVE DATA BE REPRESENTATIVE OR ROBUST? Caroline Moser 52

INTEGRATING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES: LESSONS FROM THE PASTORAL RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT Chris Barrett 56

TOWARDS A BETTER COMBINATION OF THE QUANTITATIVE AND THE QUALITATIVE: SOME DESIGN ISSUES FROM PAKISTANS PARTICIPATORY POVERTY ASSESSMENT David Booth 60

POTTERS AND SLUMS: TWO QUALITATIVE/QUANTITATIVE PROJECTS IN INDIA Vijayendra Rao 65

THE QUAL-QUANT DEBATE WITHIN ITS EPISTEMOLOGICAL CONTEXT: SOME PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS Luc Christiaensen 70

INTEGRATING THE QUAL AND THE QUAN: WHEN AND WHY? Jesko Hentschel 75

DIFFICULTIES IN COMBINING INCOME/CONSUMPTION AND PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES TO POVERTY: ISSUES AND EXAMPLES Paul Shaffer 80

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE POVERTY APPRAISAL WORKSHOP: SOME REFLECTIONS AND RESPONSES Rosemary McGee 85

WHAT IS REQUIRED TO REDUCE TENSIONS AND INCREASE COMPLEMENTARITY? Rosemary McGee 89

DATA AS SOCIAL PRODUCT: PROBLEMS IN QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE WORK Ron Herring 91

THE EMPLOYMENT PROBLEM IN SOUTH AFRICA: FROM COINTEGRATION TO MR. ISAACS Gary S. Fields 95

POVERTY RESEARCH: EXTRACTIVE OR EMPOWERING? Alex Wilks 99

TENSIONS, COMPLEMENTARITIES AND POSSIBLE CONVERGENCE BETWEEN THE QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO POVERTY ASSESSMENT Erik Thorbecke 103

i

CONFERENCE PROGRAM AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal: Complementarities, Tensions and the Way Forward

Sponsored by

The MacArthur Foundation Poverty, Inequality and Development Initiative

Cornell University March 15-16, 2001 401 Warren Hall

March 15 9.009.30 Chair: Alaka Basu Opening: Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal: The State of Play and Some Questions Ravi Kanbur 9.3011.00 Session I: Qualitative Approaches: Self-Criticism and what can be gained from Quantitative Approaches Robert Chambers, Patti Petesch and Norman Uphoff 11.0011.30 Break 11.301.00 Chair: Elizabeth Peters Session II: Quantitative Approaches: Self Criticism and what can be gained from Qualitative Approaches Martin Ravallion, Francois Bourguignon, David Sahn 1.002.30 Lunch 2.304.00 Chair: David Lewis Session IIIA: Best Practices Caroline Moser, Christopher Barrett, David Booth, Vijayendra Rao 4.004.30 Break 4.306.00 Chair: Muna Ndulo Session IIIB: Best Practices Luc Christiaensen, Jesko Hentschel, Paul Shaffer 7.30 Dinner March 16 9.3011.30 Chair: Ravi Kanbur Session IV: The Future: What Is Required to Reduce Tensions and Increase Complementarity? Rosemary McGee, Ronald Herring, Gary Fields, Alex Wilks, Erik Thorbecke Lunch and end of workshop

ii

Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal:

Complementarities, Tensions and the Way Forward

Sponsored by The MacArthur Foundation

Poverty, Inequality and Development Initiative Cornell University

March 15-16, 2001 401 Warren Hall

Speakers and Chairs From Outside Cornell: Robert Chambers, IDS, Sussex, r.chambers@ids.ac.uk David Booth, ODI, London, d.booth@odi.org.uk Francois Bourguignon, Delta, Paris, Fbourguignon@worldbank.org Luc Christiaensen, World Bank, lchristiaensen@worldbank.org Jesko Hentschel, World Bank, Jhentschel@worldbank.org Rosemary McGee, IDS, Sussex, R.McGee@ids.ac.uk Caroline Moser, ODI, London, CMOSER@odi.org.uk Patti Petesch, Consultant to The World Bank, ppetesch@worldbank.org Martin Ravallion, World Bank, Mravallion@worldbank.org Vijayendra Rao, World Bank, vrao@worldbank.org Paul Shaffer, University of Toronto, P.Shaffer@utoronto.ca Alex Wilks, Bretton Woods Project, London, awilks@brettonwoodsproject.org Cornell: Christopher Barrett, Applied Economics and Management, cbb2@cornell.edu Alaka Basu, Nutrition, ab54@cornell.edu Gary Fields, Industrial and Labor Relations, gsf2@cornell.edu Ronald Herring, Government, rjh5@cornell.edu Ravi Kanbur, Applied Economics and Management, and Economics, sk145@cornell.edu David Lewis, City and Regional Planning, dbl2@cornell.edu Muna Ndulo, Law, ndulo@law.mail.cornell.edu Elizabeth Peters, Policy Analysis and Management, ep22@cornell.edu David Sahn, Nutrition, david.sahn@cornell.edu Erik Thorbecke, Economics and Nutrition, et17@cornell.edu Norman Uphoff, CIIFAD, ntu1@cornell.edu

mailto:r.chambers@ids.ac.ukmailto:d.booth@odi.org.ukmailto:Fbourguignon@worldbank.orgmailto:lchristiaensen@worldbank.orgmailto:Jhentschel@worldbank.orgmailto:R.McGee@ids.ac.ukmailto:CMOSER@odi.org.ukmailto:ppetesch@worldbank.orgmailto:Mravallion@worldbank.orgmailto:vrao@worldbank.orgmailto:P.Shaffer@utoronto.camailto:awilks@brettonwoodsproject.orgmailto:cbb2@cornell.edumailto:ab54@cornell.edumailto:gsf2@cornell.edumailto:rjh5@cornell.edumailto:sk145@cornell.edumailto:dbl2@cornell.edumailto:ndulo@law.mail.cornell.edumailto:ep22@cornell.edumailto:david.sahn@cornell.edumailto:et17@cornell.edumailto:ntu1@cornell.edu

Q-SQUARED?

A Commentary on Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal

Ravi Kanbur Cornell University

SUMMARY

This compilation brings together the proceedings of a workshop on Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal: Complementarities, Tensions and the Way Forward. Contributors were asked to submit short summaries of their positions, with detailed references to the literature as necessary. The compilation represents a remarkable statement of the state of the art and the debate on Qual-Quant, at a time when the complementarities between the qualitative and the quantitative traditions in poverty analysis are being recognized, but the tensions are ever present, and analysts and policy makers are looking for a way forward in using the two approaches to design effective poverty reduction strategies.

The workshop spent a fair amount of time characterizing the two traditions along different dimensions, with (at least) the following five dimensions being identified:

1. Type of Information on Population: Non-Numerical to Numerical. 2. Type of Population Coverage: Specific to General. 3. Type of Population Involvement: Active to Passive. 4. Type of Inference Methodology: Inductive to Deductive. 5. Type of Disciplinary Framework: Broad Social Sciences to Neo-Classical

Economics Different contributors collapsed these dimensions in different ways, and used different sets of terminology. But there seems agreement that points more to the left in the above spectra are more qualitative in nature, while those more to the right are quantitative. Some participants pronounced themselves to be in the extreme center. What is important, it was generally agreed, are the strengths and weaknesses of locating at different points along these dimensions, for the purpose at hand. It was recognized that there are indeed strengths and weaknesses at each end of a given spectrum. Numerical information can be more easily aggregated, but it can miss out on nuance and texture. General coverage aids representativeness, but can lose context. Statistical inference can help in discussion of causality, but misses out on the power of inductive approaches. And so on. The key, then, is how to make the best of complementarities while minimizing tradeoffs.

2

There was general support in the workshop for small movements from either extreme of any of the five dimensions. The support was strongest, almost universal, for the first two dimensions. For example, those in the qualitative tradition agreed that some numerical information could and should be collected in participatory poverty appraisal (PPA). There was also agreement (less strong) that the credibility of qualitative studies with policy makers and others would be greater if site selection could