title: Spatial correlation in household choices in rural Indonesia

authors: Gibson, John

subjects: spatial correlation

abstract: Many household choices in developing economies are correlated with choices of nearby households, because nearby locations have unobserved factors in common and households and their neighbors interact. However, models recognizing these spatial correlations are rarely used because few surveys give exact household locations. In the present paper, we use unusual data from rural Indonesia, where distances between households can be measured, to examine spatial effects in equations for non-farm enterprises' share of household incomes and food's share of total household budgets. Our results indicate that ignoring spatial correlations in household choices might cause bias and inferential errors and could distort recommended policy interventions aiming to raise living standards in rural Asia.

text: Spatial correlation in household choices in rural Indonesia Many household choices in developing economies are correlated with choices of nearby households, because nearby locations have unobserved factors in common and households and their neighbors interact. However, models recognizing these spatial correlations are rarely used because few surveys give exact household locations. In the present paper, we use unusual data from rural Indonesia, where distances between households can be measured, to examine spatial effects in equations for non-farm enterprises' share of household incomes and food's share of total household budgets. Our results indicate that ignoring spatial correlations in household choices might cause bias and inferential errors and could distort recommended policy interventions aiming to raise living standards in rural Asia.

year: 2011-09

title: Henri Lefebvre on education: Critique and pedagogy

authors: Middleton, Sue

subjects: Henri Lefebvre

abstract: The ‘spatial turn’ in education policy studies fuelled interest in Lefebvre’s work: initially, in his work Production of Space and, more recently, Rhythmanalysis and Right to the City. Yet, although in these texts Lefebvre critiques universities and schools and introduces original pedagogical concepts, their educational strands have attracted little attention. Lefebvre’s other works available in English have been largely overlooked in education literature. As France’s first Professor of Sociology, Lefebvre was passionately engaged with education: in particular, teaching, competing for government grants and leading student activism. Critiques of education are threaded through Lefebvre’s three-volume Critique of Everyday Life, his writings on architecture and anthologies. Lefebvre’s work, The Explosion, is surprisingly neglected. A critique of French universities, it analyses student protests across Paris in 1968 – events in which Lefebvre was a leading activist. In geography and philosophy there are burgeoning secondary literatures on Lefebvre. Laying groundwork for such a literature in education, I survey Lefebvre’s references to education in all the works available in English. Arguing that Lefebvre was an educational thinker in his own right, this paper sketches a ‘roadmap’ for educational readings of Lefebvre’s prolific and largely sociological writing. This paper falls into three parts. The first uncovers core Marxist and phenomenological foundations of Lefebvre’s critiques of universities and schools. Building on these, it introduces Lefebvre’s pedagogical concepts. The second part contextualises these in relation to ‘New’ (or ‘Progressive’) education movements at ‘critical moments’ of 20th-century history. It includes a case study of one such moment – the 1968 Parisian student uprising – then outlines Lefebvre’s summation of education in the late 20th century. The third part draws together four ‘Lefebvrian’ pedagogical principles and considers their relevance today. Educational readings of Lefebvre, I suggest, can help educationists identify ‘cracks or interstices’ in ‘technocratic rationality’, suggesting strategies for resisting contemporary neo-liberal regimes.

text: Henri Lefebvre on education: Critique and pedagogy The ‘spatial turn’ in education policy studies fuelled interest in Lefebvre’s work: initially, in his work Production of Space and, more recently, Rhythmanalysis and Right to the City. Yet, although in these texts Lefebvre critiques universities and schools and introduces original pedagogical concepts, their educational strands have attracted little attention. Lefebvre’s other works available in English have been largely overlooked in education literature. As France’s first Professor of Sociology, Lefebvre was passionately engaged with education: in particular, teaching, competing for government grants and leading student activism. Critiques of education are threaded through Lefebvre’s three-volume Critique of Everyday Life, his writings on architecture and anthologies. Lefebvre’s work, The Explosion, is surprisingly neglected. A critique of French universities, it analyses student protests across Paris in 1968 – events in which Lefebvre was a leading activist. In geography and philosophy there are burgeoning secondary literatures on Lefebvre. Laying groundwork for such a literature in education, I survey Lefebvre’s references to education in all the works available in English. Arguing that Lefebvre was an educational thinker in his own right, this paper sketches a ‘roadmap’ for educational readings of Lefebvre’s prolific and largely sociological writing. This paper falls into three parts. The first uncovers core Marxist and phenomenological foundations of Lefebvre’s critiques of universities and schools. Building on these, it introduces Lefebvre’s pedagogical concepts. The second part contextualises these in relation to ‘New’ (or ‘Progressive’) education movements at ‘critical moments’ of 20th-century history. It includes a case study of one such moment – the 1968 Parisian student uprising – then outlines Lefebvre’s summation of education in the late 20th century. The third part draws together four ‘Lefebvrian’ pedagogical principles and considers their relevance today. Educational readings of Lefebvre, I suggest, can help educationists identify ‘cracks or interstices’ in ‘technocratic rationality’, suggesting strategies for resisting contemporary neo-liberal regimes.

year: 2016

title: The Aroha block to 1879

authors: Hart, Philip

abstract: Te Aroha was valued by Maori because of its strategic position as well as its healing hot springs, while Pakeha anticipated acquiring a large area (which shrank in size once surveyed) of fertile farming land. Before the Crown could acquire the block, the ownership of a disputed area fought over by the Marutuahu tribes (especially Ngati Maru) and Ngati Haua had to be determined. After the battle of Taumatawiwi of 1830, claimed as a victory by both sides, subsequent smaller battles continued for some years. In place of deciding ownership on this basis, the new land court struggled to make a judgment on the basis of  contradictory claims about ancestry, battles large and small, and occupation.
One part of the larger Aroha block, Ruakaka, was considered separately in 1869, resulting in the court allocating it to Ngati Haua. Also in that year, the first hearing of the Aroha Block was held, at Matamata, with the same outcome. Because of Maratuahu anger and threats of violence, Ngati Haua failed to survey the land as required, and a second hearing was held in Auckland, in 1871, at which Ngati Maru triumphed. Subsequently the block was occupied, but conflicts continued, notably when Ngati Haua gave a Pakeha permission to run cattle at Waiharakeke, further upriver. 
Starting in 1873, James Mackay slowly purchased the interests of individuals claiming ownership of the block, and paid off the Ngati Haua claimants. Then in December 1876, Ngati Tumutumu/Ngati Rahiri claimed the land for themselves, and in the following year the ownership of the Waitoki block, downstream from Te Aroha, was contested. In July 1878, a third hearing of the Aroha case commenced, resulting in Ngati Rahiri being allocated £3,000 and 7,500 acres, the remainder of the block going to Ngati Maru. Subsequently, the process of subdividing the owners’ interests proceeded, very slowly, and a small number of Pakeha settled and commenced farming or storekeeping.

text: The Aroha block to 1879 Te Aroha was valued by Maori because of its strategic position as well as its healing hot springs, while Pakeha anticipated acquiring a large area (which shrank in size once surveyed) of fertile farming land. Before the Crown could acquire the block, the ownership of a disputed area fought over by the Marutuahu tribes (especially Ngati Maru) and Ngati Haua had to be determined. After the battle of Taumatawiwi of 1830, claimed as a victory by both sides, subsequent smaller battles continued for some years. In place of deciding ownership on this basis, the new land court struggled to make a judgment on the basis of  contradictory claims about ancestry, battles large and small, and occupation.
One part of the larger Aroha block, Ruakaka, was considered separately in 1869, resulting in the court allocating it to Ngati Haua. Also in that year, the first hearing of the Aroha Block was held, at Matamata, with the same outcome. Because of Maratuahu anger and threats of violence, Ngati Haua failed to survey the land as required, and a second hearing was held in Auckland, in 1871, at which Ngati Maru triumphed. Subsequently the block was occupied, but conflicts continued, notably when Ngati Haua gave a Pakeha permission to run cattle at Waiharakeke, further upriver. 
Starting in 1873, James Mackay slowly purchased the interests of individuals claiming ownership of the block, and paid off the Ngati Haua claimants. Then in December 1876, Ngati Tumutumu/Ngati Rahiri claimed the land for themselves, and in the following year the ownership of the Waitoki block, downstream from Te Aroha, was contested. In July 1878, a third hearing of the Aroha case commenced, resulting in Ngati Rahiri being allocated £3,000 and 7,500 acres, the remainder of the block going to Ngati Maru. Subsequently, the process of subdividing the owners’ interests proceeded, very slowly, and a small number of Pakeha settled and commenced farming or storekeeping.

year: 2016