Abstract
There is a growing body of literature that points towards the great rewards that cross-disciplinary study can yield. Economics and anthropology are no exceptions to this. Economics has traditionally studied the more quantifiable dimensions of society with the aid of theories and empirical analysis. On the other hand, anthropologists have flirted with the extensive margin of social science studying entire cultures and communities to gain in-depth insights. Economics and anthropology have shared a history of little interdisciplinary interaction. This lack of cordiality has accounted for limited cross-disciplinary publications between them. In this chapter, we explore what each individual discipline offers and attempt to identify whether their broken communication can be resolved in particular to the field of displacement studies. Based on the first-hand study regarding the long-term impacts of displacement on local communities, we find out that the combination of anthropology and economics offers the most holistic perspective to assess the multi-dimensional effects of displacement because it can capture both the process and the outcome of displacement. The approach not only allows us better understand the direct livelihood impacts but also it provides insights to look at the complex ways that displaced communities’ capacity for coping with displacement intersects with local historical context over different time periods. We use this interdisciplinary model to study long-term livelihood and welfare consequences of forced displacement in Asia in subsequent chapters.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Appadurai, A. (2004). The capacity to aspire: Culture and the terms of recognition. In V. Rao & M. Walton (Eds.), Culture and public action (pp. 59–84). Stanford, CA: Stanford Social Sciences.
Bardhan, P. (2000). Irrigation and cooperation: An empirical analysis of 48 irrigation communities in South India. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 48, 847–866.
Bhattarai, A. M. (2001). Displacement and rehabilitation in Nepal: Law, policy and practice. New Delhi: Anmol Publications.
Buckley, P. J., & Chapman, M. (1996). Economics and social anthropology—Reconciling differences. Human Relations, 49, 1123–1150.
Caplan, L. (1970). Land and social change in east Nepal: A study of Hindu-tribal relations. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Cernea, M. M. (1997). The risks and reconstruction model for resettling displaced populations. World Development, 25(10), 1569–1587.
Cernea, M. M. (1999). Why economic analysis is essential to resettlement. In M. Cernea (Ed.), The economics of involuntary resettlement (pp. 5–49). Washington, DC: World Bank.
Cernea, M. M. (2003). For a new economics of resettlement: A sociological critique of the compensation principle. UNESCO, Paris: Blackwell.
Cernea, M. M., & Schmidt-Soltau, S. (2006). Poverty risks and national parks: Policy issues in conservation and resettlement. World Development, 34(10), 1808–1830.
Collier, D., Mahoney, J., & Seawright, J. (2004). Claiming too much: Warnings about selection bias. In H. Brady & D. Collier (Eds.), Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards (pp. 85–102). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Cosgel, M. (2005). Conversations between anthropologists and economists. Economics Working Papers 200529. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/econ_wpapers/200529
Crick, F. (1988). What mad pursuit: A personal view of scientific discovery. New York: Basic.
Douglas, M. (1973). The exclusion of economics. Times Literary Supplement, pp. 781–782.
Epstein, T. S. (1968). Capitalism, primitive and modern—Some aspects of Tolai economic growth. Canberra: ANU Press.
Epstein, T. S. (1975). The ideal marriage between the economist’s macroapproach and the social anthropologist’s microapproach to development studies. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 24(1), 29–45.
Greenfield, S. M. (1982). Anthropology and institutional economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 16(2), 485–487.
Grossbard, A. (1978). Towards a marriage between economics and anthropology and a general theory of marriage. Papers and Proceedings of the Ninetieth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association. The American Economic Review, 68(2), 33–37.
Gudeman, S. (2001). The anthropology of economy: Community, market, and culture. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Guha, A. (2001). Land acquisition among the cultivators of rural Medinipur, West Bengal: Anthropological appraisal. PhD dissertation, Vidyasagar University, India.
Guneratne, A. (1996). The Tax Man Cometh: The impact of revenue collection on subsistence strategies in Chitwan Tharu Society. Studies of Nepali History and Society, 1, 5–35.
Guneratne, A. (2002). Many tongues, one people: The making of Tharu identity in Nepal. New York: Cornell University Press.
Hackenberg, R. A. (1999). Advancing applied anthropology—Victims of globalization: Is economics the instrument needed to provide them a share of the wealth? Human Organization, 58(4), 439–442.
Herskovits, M. J. (1941). Economics and anthropology: A rejoinder. Journal of Political Economy, 49(2), 269–278.
Kanbur, R. (2003). Development economics and the compensation principle. UNESCO, Paris: Blackwell.
Krugman, P. (1995). Development, geography and economic theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lam, L. M. (2003). Change of perceptions of local communities and park-people conflicts in regard to Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal. Unpublished master dissertation, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Li, T. M. (2002). Engaging simplifications: Community-based resource management, market processes and state agendas in upland Southeast Asia. World Development, 30, 265–283.
Lipton, M. (1968). Interdisciplinary studies in less developed countries. Journal of Development Studies, 4, 15.
Lipton, M. (1992). Economics and anthropology: Grounding models in relationships. World Development, 20, 1541–1546.
Nayak, R. (2000). In M. Cernea & C. McDowell (Eds.), Risks associated with landlessness. Risks and reconstruction. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Pieters, R., & Baumgartner, H. (2002). Who talks to whom? Intra and interdisciplinary communication of economics journals. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 483–509.
Ray, I. (2006). Outcomes and processes in economics and anthropology. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 54(3), 677–694.
Rigney, D., & Barnes, D. (1980). Patterns of interdisciplinary citation in the social sciences. Social Science Quarterly, 61, 114–127.
Sapkota, N. (2001). Impoverishment risks and reconstruction of Kali Gandaki Dam, Nepal. High Plains Applied Anthropologist, 21(2), 147–156.
Schmidt-Soltau, K. (2002). The environmental risks of conservation-related displacements in central Africa. Paper prepared for the International Symposium on Multidimensionality of Displacement Risks in Africa, Kyoto, Japan.
Seers, D. (1969) The meaning of development (IDS Communication Series 44) (p. 5). Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.
Stern, C. (1960). Principles of human genetics. San Francisco: Freeman.
Wilk, R. R. (1996). Economies and cultures: Foundations of economic anthropology. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lam, L.M., Paul, S. (2019). Interdisciplinary Approach to Long-Term Welfare Effects of Displacement. In: Yoshino, N., Paul, S. (eds) Land Acquisition in Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6455-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6455-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-6454-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-6455-6
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)