Problems in Resolving the Enclave Economy Debate
作者探讨了社会科学中争论难以解决的原因，并以飞地经济假说为例。作者指出，争论持续是因为各方维持独立研究项目并拥有发表渠道，理论话语的特性也加剧了分歧。即使通过实证检验，分歧也常难消除。作者认为当前交流正推动飞地经济争论走向基于经验的解决。作者聚焦Portes和Jensen（1989）提出的四个假说中的第一和第三假说，这些假说涉及此前在《美国社会学评论》中辩论的问题。
D ebates in the social sciences frequently go unresolved they persist as long as the debating parties sustain independent research programs and secure outlets for their publications (Alexander and Columy forthcoming). In part, this reflects the discursive character of theoretical discourse between and within academic traditions and schools of thought. Yet even when social scientists attempt to verify hypotheses through empirical tests, resolution of differences are often difficult to achieve. Debate over the enclave economy hypothesis exemplifies this dilemma. Notwithstanding, we believe that the current exchange moves the enclave economy debate toward an empirically-grounded resolution. Portes and Jensen (1989) considered four hypotheses in their defense of the enclave economy hypothesis. The first and third of these hypotheses address issues that were previously debated in the ASR. Our comments focus on Hypotheses I and III.