The Family Kaleidoscope
Edited by Dimitri Mortelmans, Koenraad Matthijs, Elisabeth Alofs and Barbara Segaert
Chapter 9: Why demography needs (new) theories
It is widely acknowledged that the theoretical perspectives that inform demographic inquiry have often come from elsewhere. While economic theory and econometric methods have played a particularly prominent role in the development of some areas of study, including the family, demography has remained remarkably impervious to the theoretical interventions of feminism and other critical perspectives. In this chapter, the author aims to demonstrate how demographic research would benefit from a more conscious consideration of a wider range of theoretical perspectives. To this end, she focuses primarily on one particular (broad and flexible) critical analytical concept – intersectionality – and one particular area of enquiry: the study of the family. Intersectionality, which Leslie McCall (2005, p. 1771) described as ‘one of the most important theoretical contributions of Women’s Studies, along with racial and ethnic studies, so far’, has been a fleet-footed traveller in the past couple of decades, but it has not, for some reason, crossed the border into the discipline of demography. It is noteworthy that we see virtually no references to ‘intersectionality’ on the pages of demography journals. For this reason, the chapter begins with a brief introduction to the concept of intersectionality. Focusing on the issues most relevant to quantitative research, the author outlines its theoretical premise and some of the broad methodological implications. Next, concrete examples illustrate how the application of intersectionality, as a critical and reflective lens, could contribute to the way demographers study families and family policies. The overarching aim is to initiate a discussion amongst the demographic community about the productive potential of adopting a more critical and interdisciplinary theoretical perspective. Reference: McCall, L. (2005), ‘The complexity of intersectionality’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30 (3), 1771–1800.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.