Adding links,adding persons,and adding structures: Using Sen's frameworks

Abstract

This essay is a comment on “Sen on Freedom and Gender Justice,” by Mozaffar Qizilbash, which appeared in Feminist Economics Volume 11, Number 3, November 2005.

Building on the 2003 double special issue of Feminist Economics entitled “Amartya Sen's Work and Ideas,” this paper responds to the review essay by Mozaffar Qizilbash. It identifies and illustrates various possible evaluations of a theoretical system, including that it has acknowledged strengths, unrecognized strengths, remediable gaps or failings, or structural faults. The paper then looks at Sen's system as a theoretical basis for “human development”– in particular in relation to personhood, emotions, and psychological interdependence – and argues that it points in directions required for economic and social analysis, including towards theories of care, but is not itself a sufficient treatment. The paper suggests deepening Sen's system by connecting to other important languages of analysis concerning the structuring of attitudes, emotions, felt well-being, public reasoning, and politics.     

Fragments of Development: Nation,Gender, and the Space of Modernity

Adam Smith argued that capitalism was best achieved when individuals temper their economic self-interests with ethically grounded motivations. Unfortunately, Smith stopped short of articulating precisely how individuals might manage these seemingly competing interests in a way that is practical for actors in modern day organizations. We believe that a set of effective principles of justice can be found in the writings of political philosopher John Rawls. We argue that due to the empirical realities of entrepreneurs, the entrepreneurial context is aligned with Rawls' original position. We consider how Rawls' principles might inform founders of new organizations with regard to their interaction with organizational stakeholders.     

SEN ON FREEDOM AND GENDER JUSTICE

Abstract

This comment on the special double issue of Feminist Economics on Amartya Sen's work discusses a number of themes and evaluates certain criticisms and claims in the volume. Sen's work involves a complex differentiation of distinct aspects of freedom. This differentiation is relevant to a number of criticisms. It is particularly helpful in evaluating various claims about Sen's focus on and the adequacy of his account of freedom. The article also considers claims about Sen's neglect of issues relating to interdependence and agency. To the degree that it is argued that some of these claims and criticisms can be addressed within Sen's conceptual framework, this article constitutes a qualified defense of his work. However, it does not claim that Sen's framework addresses all the criticisms that are leveled at it in the volume. Possible themes for future research are also briefly discussed.     

GLOBALIZATION AND WOMEN'S PAID WORK: EXPANDING FREEDOM?

In Development as Freedom , Amartya Sen takes expanding freedom to be the primary end and the principal means of development. I discuss his emphasis on women's agency as central to development theory and practice and the strategies he advocates for enhancing it. Recent work in feminist economics and postcolonial studies tests Sen's complex account of freedom. Further levels of complexity need to be added when we examine how global forces of power interact with local systems of oppression in ways that often limit women's freedom. This argument rests on an analysis of how globalization affects a domain of freedom that is a central concern for Sen, that of increasing women's freedom to work outside the home as a way of strengthening their agency. Attending to elements missing in Sen's account will enhance freedom in women's lives.     

Sen’s criticism of revealed preference theory and its ‘neo-samuelsonian critique’: a methodological and theoretical assessment

This paper evaluates how Amartya Sen’s critique of revealed preference theory (RPT) stands against the latter’s contemporary, ‘neo-Samuelsonian’ version. Neo- Samuelsonians have argued that Sen’s arguments against RPT are innocuous, in particular once it is acknowledged that RPT does not assume away the existence of motivations or other latent psychological or cognitive processes. Sen’s claims that preferences and choices need to be distinguished and that external factors need to be taken into account to analyze the act of choice then appear to be irrelevant. However, while it is true that contemporary revealed preference theory (CRPT) partially evades Sen’s critique, I show that the latter is still relevant outside the restricted areas of consumer choice and market dynamics. In particular, Sen’s views regarding the importance of incomplete preferences and the multiplicity of levels of agency can hardly be integrated into the framework of CRPT. This is a significant limit, given the imperialistic claims of some of the proponents of the latter.     

The concept of freedom and its relation to economic development--a critical appreciation of the work of Amartya Sen

Following a brief review of the conception of freedom as employedin economic discourse, this paper focuses on the evolution ofthe concept of freedom in the work of Amartya Sen. It tracesthe development of Sen's thought from the capability analysisof the late 1970s to his more recent separation of freedom intoits opportunity and process aspects. While broadly appreciativeof Sen's development of the concept of positive freedom, thepaper identifies some difficulties arising from his definitionof capability as a set of options as well as from his separationof the opportunity and process aspects of freedom. Aspects ofthe relationship between Sen's conception of freedom and thatof Marx are discussed briefly in the context of Sen's recentdiscussion of the market as a source of freedom.     

论阿马蒂亚·森对发展经济学理论的贡献

除对福利经济学基础研究的贡献外,阿马蒂亚·森在发展经济学领域也做出了开创性的研究。主要贡献有:对"发展"的重新认识、对饥荒问题产生的内在原因的分析、技术选择与项目评估、剩余劳动力与失业问题、社会安全体系与金融危机等。森的研究极大地拓展了发展经济学的研究框架。     

强化学生服务意识 提高高职教育质量

旅游业的发展需要高素质的旅游人才，职业院校开展服务意识教育是适应旅游业发展的需要，是提高服务质量的前提条件，有助于提高旅游从业人员整体素质。职业院校开展服务意识教育必须注重四个结合，即专业课与德育课结合、专题活动与随机教育结合、校内教育与校外教育结合、学校教育与家庭教育结合，才能强化学生的服务意识，为旅游业培养高素质旅游人才。     

A new definition of and role for preferences in positive economics

Positive economic models aim to provide truthful explanations of significant (aspects of) economic phenomena. While the notion of ‘preferences’ figures prominently in micro-economic models, it suffers from a remarkable lack of conceptual clarity and rigor. After distinguishing narrow homo economicus models (self-interest maximization) from broader ones (preference satisfaction) and rehearsing the criticisms both have met, I go into the most promising attempt to date at addressing them, developed by Hausman. However, his definition of preferences as ‘total comparative evaluations’, I argue, plays into the general disregard that economists have for human psychology. My alternative definition of preferences as ‘overall comparative evaluations’ – and hence as one of the many factors that influence people’s behavior – allows for more adequate causal explanations of people’s dutiful, committed, and norm-guided actions. Against Hausman but in agreement with Sen, it also allows for (motivated) counterpreferential choice.     

The Smithian ontology of ‘relative poverty’: revisiting the debate between Amartya Sen and Peter Townsend*

ABSTRACT

Although ‘relative poverty’ is a phrase of immediate recognition, wide circulation and an ever increasing acceptance in the last half century, the concept itself remains surprisingly undertheorised. This paper wishes to try and remedy this discursive deficiency by proposing an ontological elucidation of the nature of our needs. The author re-visits the dispute between Amartya Sen and Peter Townsend — a duel of crossed wires (if not sabres), which can be seen as representative of the various theoretical takes on the nature of relative poverty. While the dispute itself ended with an unfortunate misunderstanding between the two scholars, whose different disciplinary affiliations have done nothing but replicate the rift, the author nonetheless foregrounds the commonality between the two thinkers – their respective identification with Adam Smith. By exploring points of differences and convergence with Adam Smith’s own ontology of needs, which the author reconstructed elsewhere, the paper hopes to offer insights into the ontology of ‘relative poverty’ as well as to suggest that taking this ontology seriously would lead us inevitably to a re-examination of ‘economic methodology’.