For more than 30 years, anthropologists at Brown have been active investigators and collaborators in research at the PSTC, as well as mentors to doctoral student trainees. The PSTC is recognized as a leading center for anthropological demography nationally and around the world. Anthropology provides demography with a toolkit of ethnographic methodologies, an array of culturally attuned social theory, and access to experience-near, contextually nuanced empirical evidence.
For 50 years, the journal Population and Development Review, managed by the widely respected Population Council, has been a welcoming home for qualitatively oriented research in population studies. Anthropologists have published dozens of articles there and the journal has contributed significantly to extending the reach and influence of anthropology in demography generally. Thus, when the Population Council circulated a call for proposals for papers to compete for inclusion in a 50th anniversary special edition, Brown anthropology professor and PSTC faculty affiliate Daniel Jordan Smith decided to propose a paper about the value of anthropology for population studies. Smith’s proposal was accepted, and his article was published online in November of 2024, with the print issue due out in early 2025.
In his article, “Reflections on the Value of Anthropology for Understanding Population Processes,” Smith evaluates the challenges, possibilities, and impact of drawing upon anthropological theory and ethnography for demographic research. Smith has combined ethnographic research with “surveys that are similar to what more quantitatively oriented demographers use” for his work in southeastern Nigeria, specifically regarding population processes, kinship, and health.
Smith begins his article with a brief account of the history of anthropology’s collaboration with population studies and how this laid the foundation for anthropological demography to emerge. In addition to anthropologists’ longstanding interests in population-related questions, many demographers have utilized anthropological methods and perspectives in their research and scholarship. Demographers, many following the lead of John Caldwell, adopted anthropological approaches in their studies out of recognition for the value that anthropology’s attention to social context and human experience brings to population research.
Despite overlapping interests, there remain barriers that prevent anthropologists and demographers from collaboration, Smith notes. Demography is largely based on extracting data from individuals, while anthropology places its focus on understanding the cultural, social, and political contexts within which individuals make decisions and behave. Many anthropologists have lamented that demographers tend to embrace anthropology’s methods without also utilizing its theories, with specific concerns about demography’s limited attention to politics and power. Conversely, some demographers worry about the representativeness of ethnographic data, questioning its value as evidence, and feel that anthropology relies too heavily on “jargon-laden prose, referencing insular disciplinary discourses and debates,” Smith explains, expressing considerable sympathy for the latter observation.
Still, although tensions exist, significant insights and contributions have been achieved in both fields through the interdisciplinary work of anthropological demography. These collaborations have “contributed to situating demographic behaviors, processes, and rates in many political-economic, social, and cultural contexts,” Smith reflects. In his article, Smith uses the example of anthropologists’ contributions to understand the slow pace of fertility transition in Africa as a notable example. On this topic and many others, a significant number of early-career demographers have been inspired by ethnographically oriented scholarship and gone on to implement anthropological perspectives in their own research. Because of its emphasis on studying how contextual and cultural factors influence behavior, anthropology offers many possibilities for enriching demographic research. By extension, demography’s expertise and methods can provide meaningful opportunities to enhance anthropological studies on an array of population-related topics, including marriage, family, reproduction, and migration.
Smith not only sees the benefits of the interdisciplinary nature of anthropological demography for both anthropology and demography, but he also envisions those collaborations as potential models. “I have little doubt the collaborative relationship between anthropology and demography could be extended to other fields,” he says.
While it’s certainly challenging to conduct such collaborations, Brown itself is a hub for interdisciplinary projects. From Equitable Climate Futures to the Reproductive Justice Collaborative, there are many opportunities to apply the example of anthropological demography toward future research initiatives in the social sciences and beyond.