Facilitating Methodological Pluralism Through Reflexivity: The Case of Environmental Valuation

Reflexive Methodological Pluralism: The Case of Environmental Valuation.

SSRN Electronic Journal ◽

10.2139/ssrn.2435164 ◽

2014 ◽

Author(s):

Florin Popa ◽

Mathieu Guillermin

Keyword(s):

Environmental Valuation ◽

Methodological Pluralism

Download Full-text

Reflexive Methodological Pluralism

Journal of Mixed Methods Research ◽

10.1177/1558689815610250 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 19-35 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Florin Popa ◽

Mathieu Guillermin

Keyword(s):

Research Methodology ◽

Environmental Valuation ◽

Two Dimensions ◽

Methodological Pluralism ◽

Methodological Choices ◽

Sociopolitical Context ◽

Social Experimentation ◽

Critical Questioning ◽

Combining Methods

This article argues that methodological pluralism (MP) can benefit from a deeper and more systematic integration of reflexive processes. In particular, reflexivity can facilitate meaningful and problem-specific ways of combining methods across different disciplinary fields, types of expertise, and practices. To develop our argument, we distinguish between two dimensions of reflexivity: critical (questioning of values, assumptions, and sociopolitical context underlying research methodology) and transformative (investigating pathways for change by mobilizing social experimentation and learning). We discuss two cases of research on environmental valuation that mobilizes reflexivity. We conclude by emphasizing the specific role of critical and transformative reflexivity in guiding methodological choices.

Download Full-text

Environmental Valuation in South Asia

10.1017/cbo9780511843938 ◽

2009 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

A. K. Enamul Haque ◽

M. N. Murty ◽

Priya Shyamsundar

Keyword(s):

South Asia ◽

Environmental Valuation

Download Full-text

J. M. Keynes as the Last Economist of Mainstream and a Precursor of Theoretical and Methodological Pluralism

Voprosy Ekonomiki ◽

10.32609/0042-8736-2008-1-120-130 ◽

2008 ◽

pp. 120-130 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

N. Shapiro

Keyword(s):

Economic Science ◽

Methodological Pluralism ◽

Current State ◽

Science In Russia ◽

The Difference

The article shows the methodological ambiguity of Keynes’ ideas. The simplified treatment of his views on the part of his followers is criticized. The author shows the difference between Keynes’ methodological disputes with classics and his debate with mathematical economists and econometricians, in particular with J. Tinbergen. It is shown that methodological discussions of 1930-1940 are actual for the assessment of the current state of economic science in Russia.

Download Full-text