2013Asian Social Work and Policy ReviewRequires access

Definitional Paradox and Legal Heterogeneity: Towards a Comprehensive and Operational Definition of Begging

Olivier Brito

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

This paper contributes to the quest for an operational definition of begging. Researchers and policy makers examining begging suffer from definitional shortcomings. Social scientists generally provide a minimalistic and paradoxical definition of begging. Begging is indeed, simultaneously considered as a productive activity and as a non‐reciprocated gift. Among law and policy makers, there is no consensus on a definition of begging. Begging can be defined broadly or narrowly, it can be considered as acceptable or be criminalized. In order to illustrate the need for an operational definition, the legal definitions of begging enacted in India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Philippines are compared. Major theoretical definitions of begging are also reviewed. We then suggest an operational definition of begging in which we distinguish between begging policies, begging strategies and begging techniques.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This paper contributes to the quest for an operational definition of begging. Researchers and policy makers examining begging suffer from definitional shortcomings. Social scientists generally provide a minimalistic and paradoxical definition of begging. Begging is indeed, simultaneously considered as a productive activity and as a non‐reciprocated gift. Among law and policy makers, there is no consensus on a definition of begging. Begging can be defined broadly or narrowly, it can be considered as acceptable or be criminalized. In order to illustrate the need for an operational definition, the legal definitions of begging enacted in India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Philippines are compared. Major theoretical definitions of begging are also reviewed. We then suggest an operational definition of begging in which we distinguish between begging policies, begging strategies and begging techniques.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This paper contributes to the quest for an operational definition of begging. Researchers and policy makers examining begging suffer from definitional shortcomings. Social scientists generally provide a minimalistic and paradoxical definition of begging. Begging is indeed, simultaneously considered as a productive activity and as a non‐reciprocated gift. Among law and policy makers, there is no consensus on a definition of begging. Begging can be defined broadly or narrowly, it can be considered as acceptable or be criminalized. In order to illustrate the need for an operational definition, the legal definitions of begging enacted in India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Philippines are compared. Major theoretical definitions of begging are also reviewed. We then suggest an operational definition of begging in which we distinguish between begging policies, begging strategies and begging techniques.

Key concepts: Begging, Economics, Law and economics, Sociology, Public economics, Political science, Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Definitional Paradox and Legal Heterogeneity: Towards a Comprehensive and Operational Definition of Begging — Research Paper | ScholarLens