Paper short abstract:

As a social anthropologist and a practitioner in theory-driven inquiry and evaluation, the author compares practitioners' use and positioning of theory-driven inquiry approaches on the one hand, and methods used in social anthropology on the other, in the current landscape of global health research.

Paper long abstract:

There is currently a renewed attention (and re-discovery) of social sciences theory in global health research, spurred by, amongst others, theory-driven inquiry approaches. Theory driven inquiry (TDI)approaches, with Realist Evaluation (Pawson & Tilley, 1997) as one of the main strands, are increasingly being applied in the evaluation of health programmes and in research on health policy and systems in low-and middle income countries. Its power of attraction for global health practitioners, the majority of which are primarily operating in a world defined by quantitative approaches, appears to stem from its explanatory potential. TDI makes use of social science theory to unearth causal mechanisms, which are believed to trigger social action in a given context.

Moreover, grounded in a realist epistemology and ontology, theory driven inquiry is considered as a helpful bridge between constructivism and positivism, and between statistical approaches and qualitative research, as it purports to be method-neutral. Being a social anthropologist and practitioner of theory-driven inquiry, the author critically examines the promise and pitfalls of the use of theory-driven inquiry for global health research, and its potential for opening up social anthropological methods to a wider audience of global health researchers and evaluators.