Skip Navigation


Cambridge Journal of Economics Advance Access originally published online on November 8, 2006
Cambridge Journal of Economics 2007 31(4):525-538; doi:10.1093/cje/bel032
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/4/525    most recent
bel032v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ruwanpura, K. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow B40 - General
Right arrow B50 - General
Right arrow B54 - Feminist Economics
Right arrow D13 - Household Production and Intrahousehold Allocation
Right arrow J16 - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
Right arrow P46 - Consumer Economics; Welfare and Poverty
Right arrow Z10 - General
Right arrow Z13 - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved.

Shifting theories: partial perspectives on the household

Kanchana N. Ruwanpura*

* University of Southampton

Address for correspondence: School of Geography, Shackleton Building 2072, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ UK; email: k.n.ruwanpura{at}soton.ac.uk

There is a neglect of networks within cooperative conflict models, which arises because of the patriarchal households assumed. But households are not the same everywhere, because their structure is dependent upon social context, and they are a sub-system of wider social relations and realities. Understanding households (in this paper female-headed households) requires us to study the varied contexts in which households are situated and the social relations of individuals within these institutions. Using contributions from feminist economics and realist social theory, this paper shows how these frameworks can explain the diversity of social reality in household formations and relations.

Key Words: Female headship • Ethnicity • Household models • Feminist economics • Realist social theory

JEL classifications: B4, B5, J16, P46, Z1

Manuscript received September 29, 2003; final version received July 26, 2006.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
C. Danby
Post-Keynesianism without modernity
Camb. J. Econ., November 1, 2009; 33(6): 1119 - 1133.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Review of Radical Political EconomicsHome page
K. N. Ruwanpura
Book Review: Capabilities, Freedom, and Equality: Amartya Sen's Work from a Gender Perspective Bina Agarwal, Jane Humphries, and Ingrid Robeyns (eds.); Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006, 553pp, Rs 795.00 (cloth/hardback) -- for sale in South Asia only [Published for the rest of the world as Amartya Sen's Works & Ideas: A Gender Perspective, Bina Agarwal, Jane Humphries and Ingrid Robeyns (eds); London & New York: Routledge, 2005, 350 pp, $ 150.00 (cloth/hardback); $ 43.95 (paperback)]
Review of Radical Political Economics, September 1, 2009; 41(3): 400 - 403.
[PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.