Staff Paper Series
FOOD AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611
ETHICS AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT:
A MEETING OF PHILOSOPHY, ECONOMICS, AND ANTHROPOLOGY
James R. Simpson
Staff Paper 80
Staff Papers are circulated without formal
review by the Food and Resource Economics
Department. Content is the sole responsi-
bility of the author.
Food and Resource Economics Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611
ETHICS AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT:
A MEETING OF PHILOSOPHY, ECONOMICS, AND ANTHROPOLOGY
James R. Simpson*
"A good economist certainly needs both the proverbial 'broadening'
effect of actual travel and a wide range of reading in history and all
branches of literature; and knowledge of scientific anthropology will
be useful in much the same way." (Frank Knight, "Anthropology and Eco-
nomics," The Journal of Political Economy, 1941).
The "energy crisis," a drastic cut in food reserves a few years
ago, the accelerated depletion of many scarce resources, and rapid
population growth concomitant with a generally accepted dictum that
the Lesser Developed Countries (LDC's) should attain substantially
higher per capital GNP levels point to even more serious questions in
the decade ahead about distribution of income and the cost-benefit and
ethical relationships in the use of scarce resources. Parallel with
the surfacing of these development issues has been a natural concern by
regional planners about the effects their efforts have on regions and
communities within a country. This has brought about a renewed interest
in explaining "What is development?"-/ A related question is how does
"progress" or "modernization"' (or at least change) affect the population
of the region or nation-state under study, and what are the constituent
parts of "the good life."' In summary, there is a growing interest in
ethical aspects as they relate to goals and means in regional development.
Presented as part of a symposium "Cultural Problems and Ethical Issues
in Regional Development: An Economist's Point of View," at the 1978 Annual
Meeting of the Society for Applied Anthropology in Merida, Yucatan, Mexico,
April .7, 1978.
* Associate Professor, Food and Resource Economics Department, University
When one recognizes that regional development involves political
and social considerations as well as strict economic relationships, and
as there is more demand for development planning rather than society
relying on uncontrolled market forces, the planner and his advisors such
as anthropologists and economists will find it desirable to have a clear-
er understanding of the ethical implications involved in their work and
the extent to which ethical oriented problems are important. This points
to having a knowledge of the issues considered by moral philosophers, and
a cognizance of how moral philosophy can be incorporated in the activities
of anthropologists and economists vis-a-vis regional development planning.
Because there is a need for collaboration between economists and anthro-
pologists, and since there is a question, at least by economists, on the
ethical factors relating to their involvement and impinging on their
work an attempt is made in this paper to demonstrate why economists and
anthropologists should give attention to the subject of ethics when col-
laborating on regional development projects, how moral philosophy can be
utilized, and areas of collaboration by the two disciplines, especially
where ethical principles are of importance. First, let us discuss ways
in which economists and anthropologists can collaborate and ethical issues
which must be taken into account for effective collaboration to take
Collaboration by Economists and Anthropologists
Nearly 40 years have passed since Frank Knight wrote his critique
entitled "Anthropology and Economics" of Melville J. Herskovits' pio-
neering effort Economic Anthropology.4 Despite Knight's plea for an
understanding of anthropology by economists, there have been very few
economists who have called upon anthropologists for tools which can be
utilized in their analyses.-/ Meanwhile, the fledgling subdiscipline
of economic anthropology is in the maturation process through the efforts
of anthropologists who have continued to reach over into economics for
analytical tools and theoretical concepts.-
As an integral part of economic anthropology's evolutionary pro-
cess there has been a progression by many of its adherents from the tra-
ditional study of peasant and primitive economies into development prob-
lems at the national, regional and community levels. In effect, if I
am correct, anthropologists in the subdiscipline have defined an expanded
role aimed at contemporary world problems rather than restricting them-
selves to theoretical aspects such as whether primitive man or peasants
are rational economizing people of the type described by classical or
neoclassical economists. The expanded role seems to have brought about
an introspection of the discipline as anthropologists become involved
in the change process rather than simply describing a certain group of
people. As we attempt to determine the role defined by the two disciplines,
their perception of means and ends, and avenues for collaboration, it is
useful to summarize the prevailing methodologies as they relate to a nor-
The anthropologist who follows the functionalist approach, as I un-
derstand the matter, is a researcher basically trained to study the work-
ings, the functioning if you will, of a cultural situation and, upon
completion of his findings, report them. His or her role has tradition-
ally been one of observation with ethical concerns primarily restricted
to professional practicalities.1 With the advent of the concept
called "cultural change" the applied anthropologist has, however,
been forced to rethink what his role should be as a promoter of
change. Out of the quest for an answer has come a group, primarily
those leaning toward a marxist ideology, who feel that in addition
to presenting their research findings they should also adopt a po-
sition and lobby for certain changes./ What this means is that the
action oriented social anthropologist should take a guiding role by
expounding a normative "ought" rather than simply evaluating a situ-
ation and setting forth alternatives along with attendant pros and
cons couched in terms of social costsand returns.
In economic anthropology there has been a related issue called
the formalist-substantivist debate-j which, while interesting from
the point of determining the most applicable method of economic anal-
ysis in non-Western societies, will be bypassed here as neither the
formalists such as Le Clair-' who follow the theory of the firm, nor
the substantivists such as Polanyi-/ who begin from an institutional
point, have demonstrated that their position is the most appropriate.
In fact, it has been asserted that the best method depends on the so-
ciety being studied. I would agree with this position but would add
that the method depends to a greater extent on the problem being worked
on with the cultural setting being secondary. The point is that the
economist is problem oriented while it appears that the social anthro-
pologist is more study or descriptive oriented. Perhaps I am misin-
formed, but it seems that, to the economist, the study is a tool while
to the anthropologist, in general, the study is an end in itself.
As previously mentioned there haf been a recent ascendency of marx-
ist thought in economic anthropology, especially by the so called "French
School."12- The essence of their argument is that interactions within
nonindustralized economic systems are not determined by the relationship
of exchange as set forth by both classical and neoclassical theoreticians,
even though they may seem to be. Rather, the true source is the relations
of production. The neo-marxist thought falls right back on the labor
theory of value.as the source of value rather than accepting demand as the
source of value. It should be observed that non-marxist economists dis-
carded the labor theory of value in the 1870's during the so called "mar-
ginal revolution" in economic thought.-'3 Although the economic anthro-
pologists who follow the marxist structuralist tradition are to be com-
mended for their concern about the production-marketing dichotomy, to a
non-marxist economist they often seem gloriously confused. Consider, for
example, the statement of a leading Marxist, Maurice Godelier, who states
"The maximizing of production is only one aspect of the overall strategy
of.maximizing social satisfactions which is imposed upon individuals and
groups within this society."-/ Here then, is an example of the confusion
for the problem is not maximizing production, but rather one of optimizing
it to meet the needs and desires of consumers. The non-marxist argues
that production is simply an instrument to meet final, higher goals. In
any event, considering that the battle between the formalist and substan-
tivists has raged for thirty five years with both groups talking right
past each other (because they didn't take the time to discuss the principles
of the debate) it appears that the structural-functionalist controversy may
end up in much the same way except that ideologies--ones based on ethical
issues--are involved. This magnificeptly complicates the issue taking
it beyond a simple quest for a model to handle an empirical problem.
A partial summing up indicates that a necessary condition for -
economists and anthropologists to effectively collaborate is an agree-
ment--at least on the personal level--about role limitations, the pro-
per tools for the problem, where and how value is set and how one re-
searcher can compliment the other. Because the question of how a pro-
fessional views his role in a regional development setting is so im-
portant to the direction projects can take, and because it is related
to the controversy as well as having morally related overtones, some
attention will now be given to the economist's view about what the
economist's role should be.--
One major source of concern about the relation between ethics and
economics revolves around whether economists should make statements re-
lating to moral choice. The past three decades in particular have wit-
nessed pressure on economists to act only as numbers manipulators with
their policy role limited to quantitatively evaluating the difference
between normative alternatives.16- To a certain extent, the computer
has replaced the person as the focal point since social scientists have
become increasingly enamored with the quantitative and the scientific.
In all fairness, the point is not that economists refuse to work on
policy matters but rather that they avoid setting goals or philosophical-
ly oriented standards.-
Most economists feel that their first task is to.clearly determine
the economic effects that follow from particular courses of action or
events and then, if required, to weigh different economic effects against
each other and attempt to find a balance.-1' In carrying out their
analyses economists make an attempt to quantify as many of the costs
and benefits as possible and then list the intangibles recognizing
that, if a monetary value could be placed on the intangibles, that
it might tip the balance on the total costs and returns.-19 The
economist says "so you want to carry out a project in a region, well,
I can give you insights into the cost, repayment of loans and econom-
ic feasibility under alternative approaches." Where he has often
fallen down is in failing to adequately evaluate the importance which
should be given to the intangibles, and it is this aspect which is
one useful meeting ground for collaboration by economists and anthro-
At the international level a contemporary writer, Howard Ellis,
believes that while cultural forces are fundamental factors in develop-
ment, that economists have only given them cursory treatmentbecause
they are difficult to measure quantitatively and are constantly chang-
ing. Consequently, a definitive analysis or "a" theory incorporating
culture change is difficult if not impossible to mold. Nevertheless,
Ellis observes that "just as there is a place for cultural anthropology,
there is an important role to be played by cultural economics. "- In
all events, the economist holding a liberal economic philosophy feels
that clients should only be'presented with facts, whereupon the client
makes the decision rather than depending on recommendations regarding
alternatives as well as actions.
Toward One Definition qf being "Developed"
Several decades ago a top drawer economist with a strong social
science background, Joseph Schumpeter, argued that "analytic effort is
of necessity proceeded by a preanalytic cognitive act that supplies the
raw material for analytic effort.... This preanalytic cognitive act will
be called vision."-- Now, both economists and anthropologists, if they
are to collaborate on regional development efforts, need to have a vision
of what is meant by being "developed." This is particularly true since
the area of greatest joint effort can come about by working on constraints
and intangibles, both of which are slippery areas to begin with.
Taking into account the manner in which the economist perceives his
role in the change process, I would like to define being "developed" as
a multifaceted phenomenon that is relative to each person and nation.
There is no set level at which a country or region is "developed" al-
though some indicators such as GNP per capital are useful measures.
Nevertheless, a country, region, community, or individual can be con-
sidered to be developed when there is an aura of freedom, "sufficient"
income, and there are adequate opportunities to achieve aspirations, se-
curity and esteem.
It is fully recognized that this rather nebulous definition will
'leave many of the audience cold as they expect a neat classification
which lends itself to being measured. The point which the definition
brings out, however, is that development is a personal experience and
that even though there are differences in incomes, that the term "de-
veloped" is based on factors other than income such as the reduction
of class differences, i.e., the promotion of equality and.harmonious
At first blush it seems that the definition is so wide that it is
of little use from a functional policy standpoint. Closer examination
reveals that a whole political ideology with attendant programs and
thrusts, for example, is based on a conception of whether the develop-
ment goal is one of equality of opportunity (essentially what is being
argued for in the definition) or equality (which means an effort to
make a society as homogeneous as possible, at least in economic and ma-
terial ways). In brief, the definition, or alternative definitions of
its kind, are useful for setting overall philosophies or "visions" about
the direction programs should take.
For those who still demand a classification on being "developed" a
two criteria system of the following sort might be useful. One criteri-
on could be economic, with a ranking according to per capital income and
conviences such as the number of telephones. The other gauge could be
ethical in nature with the criteria being those factors which could be
used to evaluate the variable given in the definition of development
such as levels of freedom, esteem and adequate opportunities to achieve
aspirations. The key is that being developed is individual and everchang-
ing so that there is no finish line in the race to develop, to progress
or to become modern. The "ends" for development, then, become those of
achieving short term goals with a minimum of pain and effort, goals which
blend into a means-ends continuum. Since in our definition modernism is
viewed as being relative then proper policy and sound goals dictate the
ordering of priorities according to the explicit recognition that some
groups will seize opportunities while others will let them slide by.
This paper will bypass the controversy on what constitutes a re-
gion and simply define it as an identifiable geographical area, an ad-
ministrative unit or a combination of administrative units. Regional
development will be considered to be a wedding of the previous defini-
tion of development along with a secular growth in regional output or
real income. Recognizing that regional development can be accelerated
by influences exogenous to the normal functioning of the private econ-
omy, a regional development program is defined as a public undertaking,
most likely a government venture, one of whose primary objectives is to
influence the underlying factors affecting regional output.- As econ-
omists are wont to point out, the decision of where to locate a new pro-
ject is just as important as the decision to invest in it. Unfortunate-
ly, these wonderful manipulators of economic data have not given as much
attention to how programs can be effected as the topic deserves. In ef-
fect, it is my argument that, as members of a team on development, econ-
omists need to understand the vagaries of human problems on regional pro-
jects falling under their scrutiny. In effect, the economist who is ask-
ed to participate in development projects needs help from anthropologists.
Another summing up is useful before proceeding. I have argued that
there is need for the economist and anthropologist to interact in regional
development projects because the purpose of a development program is to
bring about change in the lives of individuals, the modernization of com-
munities and changes in whole cultures. The problem, then, involves hu-
mans, rather than just investments and movements of capital. Viewed in
this light the economist on a regional project needs to collaborate with
anthropologists to determine factors which might prevent the project
from working as designed, in other words in identifying constraints.
The economist also needs help in determining the importance which
must be given to the various intangibles.
Once again, we return to a point made earlier that if anthropol-
ogist and economists are to effectively collaborate they must have a
similar vision about their role in the change agent process. It can
be hypothesized that there will be little difficulty on methodological
issues provided the anthropologist holds a functionalist philosophy as
this is basically the viewpoint of the economist. The problem comes
when the identified role includes setting goals and policies about re-
gional development and promoting them rather than simply evaluating
them and discussing the tradeoffs involved.
By now, it is apparent that I support, and in all likelihood so do
nearly all economists except the so called "radical economists," the po-
sition taken by the anthropologist George Castile that it is no part of
the business of scientists to make ethical judgments based on some eth-
nocentric and subjective morality.-3 In large part, this is because
we are scientists aiming at truth seeking. Thus, we recognize that the
"truth" about what is "best" for a society depends on that society at a
given point in time. We can evaluate these values, quantify the altern-
atives to the extent possible and discuss the implications of tradeoffs,
but the ethical choices lie entirely in the hands of the enclaved popu-
lation. At this point we need the assistance of philosophers trained
in'moral philosophy as it is their business to evaluate ethical factors
relating to values, i.e. they go beyond the work of anthropologists.
What it all boils down to, then, is tIat for anthropologists and econ-
omists to effectively work together there has to be a vision of their
role and how they view "development" and being "developed."
At this point it is useful to provide an example of how anthro-
pologists, philosophers and agricultural economists might collaborate
on a regional development project. Let's suppose that a relatively
arid area in an LDC is being considered for an irrigation project with
a dam and water distribution infrastructure. The first question is:
Should the project be carried out? Apart from political motives, is
this project desirable ethically as well as economically. A useful
point of.departure would be naming a commission to provide information
on the pros and cons, sort of a "pre-feasibility" study. It would
seem that our two disciplines plus moral philosophy would be logical
choices for three of the committee slots.
The first question raised would be: Is the project desirable in
the sense of leading to a "better" life? This would be evaluated from
the national as well as the regional level points of view. The philos-
opher could help sort the problem into the three parts which he normal-
ly considers to make up the branch of philosophy known as ethics. The
questions are: The good, the duty and value.
It is useful to recall that philosophy can be considered as a stren-
uous effort to seek the truth in areas where science is inaccessible.
What is important for our problem is that it is a search for truth through
logical reasoning rather than factual observation. In effect it compli-
ments anthropology rather nicely Ethics or moral philosophy as it is
also termed, an arm of philosophy, critically examines, clarifies and
reframes the basic concepts and presuppositions of morality. The
first task for the philosopher in our example would be in outlining
problems about value such as identifying the community values and
determining whether they are a matter of opinion, interest, attitude,
custom or law. It may be, for example, that the people in the region
are strongly anti-economic development, in effect, traditional in their
beliefs while the country as a whole is "progressive." After arriving
at agreements on appropriate values and determining why they hold them,
the philosopher would assist in discussing regional attitudes within
the context of duty or moral debate vis-a-vis national values. At this
juncture the economist and anthropologist are called upon to assist in
conceptualizing attitudes in terms of constraints and intangibles which
would be incorporated in the project analysis. If, for example, there
are strong baises against the project the economist can help by consul-
ting with technicians in identifying alternative projects which might
have similar impacts but which more fully fulfill goals that are deemed
desirable at both the regional and national level. The major point is
that the economist is taught to think in terms of alternative choice
making situations although he or she rarely thinks about them in an
ethical context! It should be noted that while all three of our erst-
while consultants have been involved in a policy issue, they have not
acted as decision makers or in a normative fashion.
Let's assume that a regional development project has been selected.
The next step is the project analysis. At this juncture the economist
and the anthropologist can really collaborate. Although help can be
gained in determining constraints to project implementation, and certainly.
there is room for defining intangibles and possibly quantifying some
of them, I would suggest that the major area of concentration for
the anthropologist could be in assisting in identifying the incremen-
tal (additional) benefits from the project. Suppose, for example,
that a major benefit is expected to be the shifting over from dryland
corn production to citrus. A typical question is: What percent of
the farmers and what percent of the land area will be changed over to
citrus? In other words, what will the adoption rate and time schedule
be? Furthermore, suppose that 30 percent are projected to remain corn
producers. What percent will adopt irrigation? What percent are late
adopters? The key here is making reliable and knowledgable estimates
of benefits, and this requires a good understanding of the "client."
Ostensibly, the example is a study in farm management--in reality it is
a study in people.
The Mexican Indian Development Program
Because this conference is being held in Mexico, it seems appropri-
ate that one concrete example be taken from this country. The one which
I would like to discuss is an approach adopted by the National Indian In-
stitute (Instituto Nacional Indigenista) (INI) with respect to their in-
digenous development program. This program, although national in scope,
can also be considered a regional effort albeit one that is aimed at num-
erous regions throughout the country. Their regional approach is, in
fact, clearly delineated in item number five of the thirteen points which
constitute the core of their affirmative action program. This item
specifically states that the programs must be regional in nature given
the impossibility of developing a community in isolation.-'
In contradistinction to the United States Indian policy which has
vacilated with bewildering rapidity from pushing Indians into the main-
stream of U.S. economic life to encouraging Indians to remain isolated
on their reservations in cultural distinctness,- I.N.I. has long rec-
ognized the value of a policy which pulls or steers regional development
by extending opportunities to the target groups. As a part of the sixth
point they state "we adopt the relativist concept of culture, as well as
a clear democratic position, when we consider that the utilization of com-
pulsory process should be energetically rejected, by whomever they may be,
to make the indigenous community adopt new forms of life, new cultural pa-
trons."' By adopting the position that the change agent's role, and
certainly the economist and anthropologist working on regional development
projects walk arm in arm in this area, is to first research the aspirations
of the clients and their possibilities for adoption of what can be offered,
and then assist in offering--not forcing, but offering--the means for re-
gional development, I.N.I. has set forth guidelines for regional development
which I, as an economist, find ethically acceptable and stimulating. Hope-
fully these principles are carried out in practice.
In parting, it is useful to reconsider the title of this paper which
is "Ethics and Regional Development: A Meeting of Philosophy, Economics,
and Anthropology." Within this context, if the goal is taken to be im-
proving peoples lifestyles, general contentment with their surroundings
and the feeling that they can self-actualize, it would seem that the
ethical goal of regional development, the vision if you will, should
be on helping or steering, but not pushing. This is what I.N.I. set
out to do when they developed the concept of the indigenous coordi-
nating centers (los centros coordinadores indigenistas).
Throughout this paper I have displayed an optimistic view about
the possibility of economists working with anthropologists. Let me
end on a note of caution which will also serve to tie the beginning
section on methodologies together. It must be clearly understood that
the economist's whole training and orientation is in evaluating altern-
ative situations with the expectation that the highest benefit cost ra-
tio alternative, subject to political, cultural and other constraints
will be adopted. I would speculate that the anthropologist, on the
other hand, does not think in terms of alternatives. He is trained to
describe a given situation and draw conclusions about it. Given this
dichotomy, my feeling is that someone will have to give way if there is
to be effective dialogue and collaboration. If the view is adopted
that there are alternatives to reaching a "better" or higher quality of
life, and that they are not always economically determined, then the re-
gional planning example in which the ethitician is brought in is useful.
If, however, there is a strong belief that regional development is "de-
termined" (in the marxist sense) and not set according to people desires
and values, and that alternatives should not be explored, then the gap is
wide and the economists basic orientation is violated. This is a problem
which needs to be considered.
As population continues to grow, and as it becomes increasingly ap-
parent that there will be insufficient resources for many people in LDC's
to meet their personal and societal gpals and aspirations, in effect
to develop in the fullest sense of the word, there will be increasing
demands on anthropologists, economists and philosophers to assist plan-
ners in determining right courses of action for regional development.
The planner will be requesting help on determining means and ends and
he will expect answers. If our disciplines are to remain relevant we
will have to provide those answers. The difficulty will lie in our
restricting our roles to advisors rather than also attempting to set
1!See for example Douglas V. Steere, "Development: For What?",
in Development: For What?, ed., John H. Hollowell (Durham, North
Carolina: Duke Univ. Press, 1964).
2/In addition to the wonderful selection of literature on the
subject by anthropologists such as Edward H. Spicer (ed) Human Prob-
lems in Technological Change (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1952),
Manning Nash "Some Social and Cultural Aspects of Economic Develop-
ment," Economic Development and Culture Change 7 No. 2, (January,
1959): 142, and Talcott Parsons, Societies: Evolutionary and Com-
parative Perspectives (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1966), there
have been a number of good articles and books by economists and other
researchers. See for example, Reinhard Bendix, "What is Moderniza-
tion?", in Developing Nations Quest for a Model, ed. Willard A. Beling
and George 0. Tutten (New York: Von Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1970).
*For an interesting history of how man has viewed progress see
Warren W. Wagner, Good Tidings: The Belief in Progress from Darwin
to Marcuse (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1972).
!/Frank H. Knight, "Anthropology and Economics" The Journal of
Political Economy Vol, XLIX No. 2, April, 1941, and reprinted in Mel-
ville J. Herskovits, Economic Anthropology: The Economic Life of
Primitive Peoples, (New York: W.W. Norton and Co., Inc., 1965). The
book was first published in 1940 as The Economic Life of Primitive
5/There are a few exceptions such as George Dalton. For more de-
tail see James R. Simpson, "Uses of Cultural Anthropology in Economic
Analysis: A Papago Indian Case, Human Organization Vol. 29, No. 3,
(Fall, 1970), pp. 162-168. Also, see Leonard Joy, "One Economist's
View of the Relationship Between Economics and Anthropology," in Ray-
mond Firth, (ed) Themes in Economic Anthropology, (New York: Tavi-
stock Publications, 1967), pp. 29-46.
6/For example, see Talal Asad, "The Concept of Rationality in
Economic Anthropology," Economy and Society, (1974) 3(2): 211-218;
Schneider, (eds) Economic Anthropology (New York: Holt, Rinehart,
and Winston, 1968).
_/ Society for Applied Anthropology, "Code of Ethics," Human
Organization 10, No. 2, (Summer, 1951), and "Professional Ethics:
Statements and Procedures of the American Anthropological Associa-
tion," (September, 1973).
8/A good review is Maurice Godelier, "Anthropology and Economics,"
in Marxist Perspectives in Anthropology (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, 1977) as well as the Spanish language book he edited An-
thropologia y Economia (Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Anagrama, 1974).
9JSee David Kaplan, "The Formal Substantive Controversy in Eco-
nomic Anthropology: Reflections on its wider Implication," Southwest-
ern Journal of Anthropology (1968) 24(3): 288-251.
1-/Le Clair, Edward and Harold Schneider, Economic Anthropology:
Readings in Theory and Analysis (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
-L/Dalton, George, Primitive, Archaic and Modern Economics: Essays
of Karl Polanyi (New York: Doubleday Inc., 1968).
12/See for example, Claude Meillassoux, L'Anthropologie 6 Conomique
des Gouro de Cote d'Ivoire (Mouton, 1964): Objet et m6thodes de l'An-
thropologie 6 conomique by Maurice Godelier (1965); and Stone Age Eco-
nomics by Marshall Sahlins (Aldine, 1972).
--For a good summary of the issues see Henry W. Spiegel, The
Growth of Economic Thought, (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersy: Prentice-
Hall, Inc., 1971). The entire Fall, 1972 issue of History of Political
Economy Vol. 4, No. 2, is devoted to this subject.
14/Maurice Godelier, Rationality and Irrationality in Economics,
(New York: Monthly Review Press, 1972).
15/For more detail see Jorgensen, J.G. "On Ethics and Anthropology,"
Current Anthropology 12 (1971), Pp. 321-34.
-16See for example W. Beckerman, "The Economist as Modern Missionary,"
The Economic Journal 66 (March 1966): P. 115, Walter A. Weisskopf, "Eco-
nomics and Meaninglessness," Crosscurrents 12, No. 4, (Winter, 1973): 353.
17/For more discussion see John D. Black, "Should Economists Make
Value Judgments?," Quarterly Journal of Economics 67, (1953): 286-297.
1-/See Glen Johnson, "Economics, Ethics, Food and Energy," presented
as the Professor James C. Synder Memorial Lecture at Purdue University,
A fine review of the methodology followed by agricultural economists
is presented in "An Essay on the Idea and Logic of Agricultural Economics,"
an unpublished Ph.D. dissertation by Yang Boo Choe, University of Missouri--
Columbia, August, 1977.
1/A good discussion about the wVy in which intangibles are hand-
led is given by J. Price Gittinger in Economic Analysis of Agricultur-
al Projects (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press), 1972.
2-/Howard S. Ellis, "How Culture Shapes Economic Growth," Arizona
Review 20 (January, 1971): 9.
21"Joseph A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis, (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1954), P. 41.
-'For more detail by a specialist who defines regional develop-
ment in strictly economic terms, see John V. Krotilla, "Criteria for
Evaluating Regional Development Programs," The American Economic Re-
view, Vol. 45 (May, 1955). This paper is reprinted in the book by
John Friedman and William Alonso, (ed) Regional Development and Plan-
ning: A Reader (Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press), 1964.
2iCastille, George P., "An Unethical Ethic; Self-Determination
and the Anthropological Conscience," Human Organization, Vol. 34, No.
1 (Spring, 1975), pp. 35-40.
-4/Instituto Nacional Indigenista (I.N.I.), Los Centros Coordina-
dares Indigenistas, Mexico City, Mexico, 1962.
2JSpicer, E.H., A Short History of the Indians of the United States
(New York: Von Nostrand, 1969); and Brophy, William A., and Sophie D.
Aberle, et. al, The Indians, America's Unfinished Business (Norman, Okla-
homa: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966).
2WIbid, I.N.I., p. 9. This is an unofficial translation of the
text, which is in Spanish.