Household Composition Timeline

Abstract

Those who conduct applied field research cannot ignore the importance of the household as a unit of analysis. Academics and practitioners alike have written a great deal about the prominence of households around the world and throughout history. One of the difficulties often encountered with using the household as a unit of analysis is how best to compare households for the purpose of making relevant suggestions for how they might best reach their goals. This article introduces a tool to document how households are affected by changes in variables such as composition, economics, politics, and the natural environment. The article provides a step-by-step methodology for documenting household composition and other changes a household may experience over time. The methodology is then applied to a case study in which the benefits and drawbacks of this approach are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barnard, A., and A. Good. 1984. Research practices in the study of kinship. London: Academic Press.

Brown, S. 1977. Household composition and variation in a rural Dominican village. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 8 (2): 257-267.

Brydon, L., and S. Chant. 1989. Women in the Third World: Gender issues in rural and urban areas. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Capra, F., D. Steindl-Rast, and T. Matus. 1991. Belonging to the universe: Explorations on the frontiers of science and spirituality. San Francisco: Harper.

Chayanov, A. V. 1966. The theory of peasant economy. Homewood, IL: American Economic Association.

Collier, J. F., and M. Z. Rosaldo. 1981. Politics and gender in simple societies. In Sexual meanings: The cultural construction of gender and sexuality, edited by S. B. Ortner and H. White-head, 275-329. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Fortes, M., and E. E. Evans-Pritchard, eds. 1940. African political systems. London: Oxford University Press.

Fox, R. 1967. Kinship and marriage: An anthropological perspective. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.

Goody, J. 1958. The developmental cycle in domestic groups. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

10.

Hammel, E. A. 1961. The family cycle in a coastal Peruvian slum and village. American Anthropologist 63:989-1005.

11.

Hammel, E. A. 1972. The zadruga as process. In Household and family in past time, edited by P. Laslett with R. Wall, 335-373. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

12.

Hammel, E. A., and P. Laslett. 1974. Comparing household structure over time and between cultures. Comparative Studies in Society and History 16:73-107.

13.

Handwerker, W. P. 1973. Technology and household configuration in urban Africa: The Bassa of Monrovia. American Sociological Review 38:182-197.

14.

Handwerker, W. P. 1977. Family, fertility, and economics. Current Anthropology 18 (2): 259-287.

15.

Kabeer, N. 1994. Reversed realities: Gender hierarchies in development thought. New York: Verso.

16.

Maine, H. 1861. Ancient law. London: Murray.

17.

Malinowski, B. 1913. The family among the Australian Aborigines. London: Hodder.

18.

McLennon, J. F. 1865. Primitive marriage. Edinburgh, UK: Adam & Charles Black.

19.

Meillassoux, C. 1981. Maidens, meal, and money: Capitalism and the domestic community. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

20.

Moore, H. L. 1988. Feminism and anthropology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

21.

Morgan, L. H. 1871. Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

22.

Netting, R., R. R. Wilk, and E. J. Arnold. 1984. Households: Comparative analysis and historical studies of the domestic group. Berkeley: University of California Press.

23.

Ortner, S. B., and H. Whitehead. 1981. Introduction. In Sexual meanings: The cultural construction of gender and sexuality, edited by S. B. Ortner and H. Whitehead, 5. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

24.

Strathern, M. 1994. New knowledge for old? Reflections following Fox's Reproduction and Succession. Social Anthropology 2:263-279.