The distinction between a micro and a macro level of analysis is a very useful tool in our study of development, as it has been in the study of so many other phenomena. Those who study development at the micro level focus on the individual as their system, those who study development at the macro level focus on the institution as their system, and those who aspire to integration can interlock the micro and macro contributions by recognizing that they are dealing with a hierarchy of systems within systems in which the individual is a subsystem of the institution.

      However, both those levels of analysis within traditional science represent the point of view of an 'objective' observer looking at the systems from the outside-in. They differ only in their relative closeness to the hierarchy of system - the micro person is taking a close-up view of the individual whereas the macro person is taking a long-shot view of the institution in which the individual dwindles to a dot in a frequency distribution.

      I will argue here that it is necessary to look at development from the inside-out as well as from the outside-in, that the familiar distinction between micro and macro levels of analysis must be supplemented by the less familiar distinction between outside-in and inside-out points of view [1]. Those two dichotomies yield four approaches to development as diagramed in Figure 4.1. Tentative names for each of those four approaches have been entered in the appropriate cells [2].

      1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16      

17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29