| Reviews / Comptes Rendus | Labour/Le Travail, 61

REVIEWS / COMPTES RENDUS

Libby Schweber, Disciplining Statistics: Demography and Vital Statistics in France and England, 1830 – 1885 (Durham: Duke University Press 2006)

LIBBY SCHWEBER provides a comparative historical overview of the drive to recognize population statistics as a discipline in two liberal states (England and France) in the 19th century. Schweber compares the conditions and challenges that influenced the struggle to promote and institutionalize demography in France and vital statistics in England as disciplines that identify causes of social phenomena and inform social policy through the use of statistical manipulation and analyses. Disciplinary recognition of demography in North America was also an issue for much of the twentieth century, and recognition eventually benefited from an influx of funds from the Rockefeller Foundation and a strategic alliance between demography and social policy. In her book, Disciplining Statistics, Schweber describes and analyzes the struggles of key figures in their pursuit to establish population statistics as a separate discipline and documents the historic use of some demographic terms and concepts.

The gatekeepers of "Political Economy" and the "Academy of Science" rejected efforts by Achille Guillard and Adolphe Bertillon to have their respective statistical approaches incorporated into mainstream academic thought in France. That rejection was a key factor in encouraging the two men in a bid to establish their demographic approach as a separate discipline in France around the mid-nineteenth century. Unlike France, the use of statistics in England was supported in medical science, and by 1839 vital statistics was institutionalized. The appointment of William Farr in the General's Registrar's Office was instrumental in its early success. Farr also played a key role in framing vital statistics as a problem- oriented approach especially in the domain of public hygiene (e.g. Farr's work on the mortality rate of various districts). Despite some progress towards disciplinary recognition in the second half of the nineteenth century, success was shortlived, and demography and vital statistics were superseded by other disciplines (geometric methods in France and mathematical statistics in England), while the establishment of population statistics was overtaken by other established groups.

In documenting the history of disciplinary claims of demography and vital statistics, Schweber examines how and why statistical notions differed in the two countries. She compares the political, administrative, and institutional settings in England and France. Despite their access to similar statistical knowledge, intellectuals and state officials in the two countries formed different views of population statistics and their purpose within liberal states that supported government intervention to serve the interests of their citizens. Unlike their English counterparts, French statisticians opposed the idea of a statistical population that is made up of the aggregation of heterogeneous individuals and/or groups. They feared that arithmetic averages would not accurately depict the experience of individuals and might provide a misleading image of the nation. Such fear was not shared by English statisticians.

The central argument of the book is that the differences in the "styles of statistical reasoning" between the two countries were largely due to differences in the political, administrative, and scientific environment in England and France. In making her argument, Schweber uses a broad definition of the discipline "as any activity associated with the introduction of a new disciplinary category." (222) Through the use of published records and an institutional context framework, Schweber analyzes the events and developments that had an impact on the struggle of demography and vital statistics for disciplinary recognition. The nature of the political, administrative, and scientific institutions shaped the purpose of population statistics. The use of vital statistics was instrumental in informing England's social policy, especially in influencing public opinion and evaluating the effectiveness of certain laws and public interventions.

The social, economic, political, and technical domains of vital statistics were interconnected in England, and political considerations were factored into the evaluation of new statistical techniques. English statisticians acted as experts in social policy (especially in public health), and this contributed to a problem-oriented approach. Similarly, demography in North America for much of the second half of the twentieth century was problem- oriented. Population centres were established in various universities to train scholars to respond to the "crisis" of high fertility rates and high population growth rates in developing countries after World War II. The decline in fertility rates and the increase in the elderly population in developed countries are current issues which demographers are asked to tackle.

In contrast to Britain, statistical developments in France were not incorporated into the social and political context, and the acceptance or rejection of statistical claims in France was based on epistemological criteria only. There were also fewer opportunities for the French statisticians to participate in social policy decision-making as they were excluded in favour of the graduates of elite professional schools.

The new emerging political and administrative order in England and France in the 1870s and 1880s had a significant impact on the status of demography and vital statistics. The French Republicans promoted positivist science (to which demography subscribes) following their political victory; however, the graduates of elite professional schools took over the demographic movement. In England too, vital statistics had limited success in defending itself as a separate discipline. Population experts' access to social policy became restricted. The discipline did not survive especially after the professionalization of public health, and the techniques of vital statistics were incorporated into other existing administrative and scientific structures.

Schweber provides interesting insights into the status of demography and vital statistics in France and England in the nineteenth century. While the book traces the early origin of demographic disciplinary activity in France, the events that led to the institutionalization of vital statistics in England are not equally developed. The introduction is a bit dry, and some of its sections seem to lack coherence or to connect well with other sections. Beyond the introduction, however, this is a lively book that assesses why some disciplines emerge as separate fields of study and maintain their separate existence while others, despite valiant efforts, fail to establish deep enough roots to earn longevity.


RANIA TFAILY Carleton University

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.