Scales of Observation

Author(s):  
Dominique Desjeux

One of the particularities of applied anthropology is working on demand, and performing research on demand requires changing fields constantly. This diversity of fields has led to an awareness in applied anthropology that the focal point of observation varies from study to study, and that depending on the particular scope or decoupage, researchers do not see the same thing. This scales-of-observation method has four empirical principles: (a) What one observes at one scale vanishes at another scale. (b) The causes explaining actors’ behavior vary based on the scale of observation; they can stem from situational effects or meaning effects, or suggest statistical correlation. (c) Knowledge acquired at one scale is complementary and cumulative with that of other scales of observation. However, they cannot be fused into a single, global description. Indeed, although reality is continuous, observation between the “macro” and the “micro” is discontinuous. Discontinuity stems from the importance of the situational effects in anthropology and organizational sociology. These two approaches are most often centered on the interactions among actors operating under situational constraints. All generalizations are thus limited to scales pertaining to the same type of causality. (d) Part of the conflict among schools, disciplines, or professions regarding explanations for human behavior and changes within a community, an organization, a society, or an individual can most often be explained by different choices in the scale of observation. The scales-of-observation method is a mobile tool of knowledge founded on the anthropological practice of the cultural detour, in this case scientific cultures. It is an inductive epistemological theory on the variability of the explanatory causes of human behavior and falls under methodological relativism. Consequently, the scales-of-observation method is also a tool of negotiation among actors who are involved collectively in a project of social change, but with contradictory interests or objectives.

Author(s):  
Saurabh Sen ◽  
Ruchi L. Sen

NPA is a “termite” for the banking sector. It affects liquidity and profitability of the bank to a great extent; in addition, it also poses a threat to the quality of asset and survival of banks. The post-reform era has changed the whole structure of the banking sector of India. Now, the economy is not confined to the domestic boundary of the country. The core intention of economic reforms in India was to attract foreign investments and create a sound banking system. This chapter provides an empirical approach to the analysis of profitability indicators with a focal point on Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) of commercial banks in the Indian context. The chapter discusses NPA, factors contributing to NPA, magnitude, and consequences. By using an analytical perspective, the chapter observes that NPAs affected significantly the performance of the banks in the present scenario. On the other hand, factors like better credit culture, managing the risk, and business conditions led to lowering of NPAs. The empirical findings using observation method and statistical tools like correlation, regression, and data representation techniques identify that there is a negative relationship between profitability measure and NPAs.


2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 243-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer K. Silbereisen ◽  
Martin J. Tomasik
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Yusuke NAKATANI ◽  
Motoki OKUMURA ◽  
Yoshiaki IWAOKA ◽  
Shuzo NISHIDA

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document