The sociology of development has not always focused on trying to address or ameliorate poverty. In this paper we cast the foundations for a problem-solving sociology of development by identifying three problem-solving traditions in the subdiscipline: the developmental states tradition, a new tradition focusing on collective action in pursuit of redistribution, and the coping strategies tradition. We show how the articles in this special issue on Solving Global Poverty take these traditions forward, and we call for a reorientation of the subfield to the task of addressing global poverty.
There are clear theoretical links among income inequality, wealth inequality, and forest loss in low- and middle-income nations. However, we are aware of little cross-national research that investigates these relationships, and the cross-national research on forest loss has yielded contradictory results. In this study, we examine the relationships among income inequality, wealth inequality, and forest loss from 2001 to 2015 among 67 low- and middle-income nations using ordinary least squares regression models. We find that higher levels of income and wealth inequality correspond with increased forest loss in low- and middle-income nations. We carry out a variety of checks to ensure the findings are not the result of omitted variable bias, endogeneity, or measurement error. We conclude by reviewing the theoretical and methodological implications of the study, along with policy suggestions that may address income inequality, wealth inequality, and forest loss simultaneously in low- and middle-income nations.
Why have postcolonial states pursued such different approaches to incorporating peasants into agricultural development? This paper addresses that question by introducing the concept of peasantry embeddedness and examining how it took shape in post-independence Indonesia and Malaysia, two major economies in the Asian rubber belt. Peasantry embeddedness refers to the depth and structure of rural producers’ institutional and political incorporation in state-led development. It captures a spectrum of state–peasant relationships, ranging from inclusion and partnership to marginalization and repression. On one end of the spectrum, peasants are regarded as development partners, with access to land, resources, and political representation. On the other, they are excluded from policy processes and subjected to coercion and repression. These configurations were not automatic outcomes of colonial institutions or class structures. Instead, they were shaped by critical political events that redefined the state’s orientation toward the peasantry during formative periods of postcolonial state-building. Drawing on archival research and applying the framework of critical event analysis, the paper examines how specific episodes—such as the Malayan land reforms of the 1950s (late colonial period) and the Indonesian peasant massacres of 1965–1967 (post-independence period)—produced contrasting modes of agrarian incorporation. These events, shaped by Cold War geopolitics and domestic unrest, conditioned whether peasants were viewed as legitimate actors in development or as political threats to be contained. By tracing how postcolonial governments responded to peasant mobilization, the paper provides a historically grounded explanation of development divergence in Southeast Asia. The analysis contributes to critical agrarian studies, to the sociology of development, and to the broader goals of problem-solving sociology. It shows that enduring patterns of rural exclusion are rooted in historically contingent political decisions rather than inevitable institutional failure. Understanding peasantry embeddedness helps explain why some states have been able to support inclusive development, while others have perpetuated forms of exclusion that contribute to the persistence of global poverty.
Governments often collaborate with the private sector to design and implement major economic initiatives. In studying such state–society collaborations, sociologists tend to focus on how institutional contexts drive outcomes. Although this institutional approach has proven generative, it can overlook important micro-level interaction patterns between state and private-sector actors that could also affect economic outcomes. In this study, we examine how bureaucrats in the Indian government interacted with private-sector representatives to design and implement an industrial crafts park. Using ethnographic observations, interviews, and supplemental survey data, we show how bureaucrats’ status biases in favor of certain private-sector actors led to interaction patterns that blinded them to fatal flaws in the project design and ultimately contributed to its dramatic failure. Bringing an interactionist lens to state–society economic engagements, this study reveals how interaction patterns can aggregate to influence large-scale development outcomes. More broadly, it highlights an important but undertheorized pathway by which bureaucrats may inadvertently cement social stratification through the very projects that aim to alleviate economic inequality. We propose that an interactionist approach to state–private collaborations and policy design can contribute to solving global poverty.
This paper examines the complex and uneven impact of credit on low-income urban households in India, with a focus on women’s borrowing practices and intra-household financial dynamics. Drawing on four years of ethnographic research and in-depth interviews in Mumbai, it moves beyond income-based measures of poverty to analyze credit’s role in asset accumulation and erosion and intergenerational mobility. While women borrowers show notable financial agency in navigating multiple credit sources, outcomes vary widely: only a small subset achieve upward mobility, while many maintain or lose economic ground. These divergent trajectories are shaped not only by external economic conditions but also by intra-household cooperation, dynamics of control over credit, and long-term family investment strategies. By foregrounding the social processes mediating credit use, this study offers a grounded, intra-household perspective on broadening financial access among lower-income households globally. It concludes with policy recommendations aimed at reimagining credit systems through family-centered financial counseling and through product design that supports household-level cooperation and long-term resilience.
