{"title":"定位和扩展生计研究","authors":"M. Prowse","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1147573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Much poverty and development research is not explicit about its methodology or philosophical foundations. Based on the extended case method of Burawoy and the epistemological standpoint of critical realism, this paper discusses a methodological approach for reflexive inductive livelihoods research that overcomes the unproductive social science dualism of positivism and social constructivism. The approach is linked to a conceptual framework and a menu of research methods that can be sequenced and iterated in light of research questions.","PeriodicalId":383948,"journal":{"name":"New Institutional Economics","volume":"199 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Locating and Extending Livelihoods Research\",\"authors\":\"M. Prowse\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1147573\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Much poverty and development research is not explicit about its methodology or philosophical foundations. Based on the extended case method of Burawoy and the epistemological standpoint of critical realism, this paper discusses a methodological approach for reflexive inductive livelihoods research that overcomes the unproductive social science dualism of positivism and social constructivism. The approach is linked to a conceptual framework and a menu of research methods that can be sequenced and iterated in light of research questions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":383948,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Institutional Economics\",\"volume\":\"199 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Institutional Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1147573\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Institutional Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1147573","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Much poverty and development research is not explicit about its methodology or philosophical foundations. Based on the extended case method of Burawoy and the epistemological standpoint of critical realism, this paper discusses a methodological approach for reflexive inductive livelihoods research that overcomes the unproductive social science dualism of positivism and social constructivism. The approach is linked to a conceptual framework and a menu of research methods that can be sequenced and iterated in light of research questions.