Famine falsehoods and publication ethics: rejoinder to Daoud and the Journal of International Development

Bowbrick, Peter (2024): Famine falsehoods and publication ethics: rejoinder to Daoud and the Journal of International Development.

Abstract

My paper, ‘Falsehoods and Myths in Famine Research – The Bengal Famine and Daoud’ (2022a), refuted Daoud’s paper, ‘Synthesizing the Malthusian and Senian approaches on scarcity: a realist account’ (2018) which presented an empirical model of the Bengal famine of 1943 using his theory. I showed at length that most of his key factual statements were falsehoods, and most of these were contradicted by evidence in his sources. His analysis was wrong. In this rejoinder I show that his Response in the Journal of International Development has not attempted to challenge my criticisms. Instead, he wrote on a subject not relevant to them, diverting attention from them. He has also produced new falsehoods. There are multiple breaches of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines by the author and by the Journal. It is surprising that the Journal, knowing this, should have published this paper.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Famine; Famine falsehoods; Bengal; Daoud; Publication ethics; Journal of International Development
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q13 - Agricultural Markets and Marketing ; Cooperatives ; Agribusiness; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q18 - Agricultural Policy ; Food Policy

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Great Britain. (2008a). The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations. London: The Stationery Office.

Great Britain. (2008b). The Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations 2008. London: The Stationery Office.

Great Britain. (2013). The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading (Amendment) Regulations 2013 (Draft). London: The Stationery Office.

Mahalanobis. (1943). Organisation of Statistics in the Post-War Period. Symposium, (pp. 69-78).

Mahalanobis, P. (1944). Organisation of Statistics in the Post-War Period. Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India, x P.71.

Mahalanobis, P., Mukkerjee, R., & Ghosh, A. (1946). A sample survey of after effects of Bengal famine of 1943. . Sankhya, 7(4),337-400.

Padmanabhan, S. (1973). The Great Bengal Famine. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 11:11-24.

Padmanabhan, S. Y., Raichoudhury, K. R., & Ganguly, D. (1948). Helminthosporium disease of rice, I. Nature and extent of damage caused by the disease. Indian Phytopathology , 1,1, 34-47.

Padmanabhan, S., & Ganguly, D. (1953). Relation between the age of rice plant and its susceptibility to helminthosporium and blast diseases. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, Section B, 39 (2). pp. 44-50.

Padmanabhan, S., Raichoudhury, K., & Ganguly, D. (1948). Helminthosporium disease of rice, I Nature and extent of damage caused by the disease. Indian Phytopathology, I, 1, 34-47.

Rajan, N. (1944). Famine in Retrospect. Bombay: Pamda Publications.

Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. (1928). Report of the Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. Parliamentary Papers, VIII, P.605.

Smith, R. (2021, July 8). Time to assume that health research is fraudulent. Retrieved from British Medical Journal: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/07/05/time-to-assume-that-health-research-is-fraudulent-until-proved-otherwise/

Tauger, M. (2006). Entitlement, Shortage, and The 1943 Bengal Famine. Journal of Peasant Studies.

Tauger, M. (2009). The Indian Famine Crisis of World War II. British Scholar, Vol. I, Issue 2 (March).

Trevaskis, H. K. (1931). The Punjab of Today. Lahore: 2 vols, Cited in Dewey (1978).