HomeGroupsTalkMoreZeitgeist
Search Site
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

Development as Freedom by Amartya Sen
Loading...

Development as Freedom (original 1999; edition 2000)

by Amartya Sen (Author)

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingMentions
1,5801311,234 (3.96)14
This is a treatise on the importance of individual freedom, both as an end in itself and as the best means of economic development. It is based on a series of lectures Sen gave in 1996-7, which netted him a Nobel Prize in Economic Science. Nearly two decades later, all of his points seem obvious, but I bet they were revolutionary at the time. His writing is an odd mixture of turgid institutional-ese with occasional hilarious sarcastic asides or brilliantly lucid and forthright sentences. Here's an example of the prose you get upon opening this book: "[To base our choices on reason] we need an appropriate evaluative framework; we also need institutions that work to promote our goals and valuational commitments, and furthermore we need behavioral norms and reasoning that allow us to achieve what we try to achieve."

Sen credits the "fast economic progress" of East Asian and Southeast Asian economies to social reforms; he claims that in addition to social reforms having positive economic consequences, "lack of social development can quite severely hold up the reach of economic development." He references studies done in India which showed increased economic growth and overall life expectancy and decreased infant mortality and fertility rate after initiatives to improve female literacy and out-of-the-home employment. Additionally, contrasting states within India, or India vs China, show that providing agency and education to women is more effective at reducing fertility and infant mortality than coercive birth control methods. All of this is a delight to read--it's like being told one can have one's cake and eat it too.

Increased freedom and individual agency also prevents some disasters. Sen notes that expending less than 3% of the GNP, or 4-5% of national food consumption, will end a famine, so long as the arrangements are made "in good time." They can be prevented entirely through countervailing government expenditure, particularly in (temporary) job creation. He goes on to say that "Famines are, in fact, so easy to prevent that it is amazing that they are allowed to occur at all. The sens of distance between the ruler and the ruled--between 'us' and 'them'--is a crucial feature of famines."

By far my least favorite section was entitled "Social Choice and Individual Behavior," which consists of dismantling several strawmen (It is impossible to rationally derive social choices from individual preferences! All actions have unintended consequences, so trying to do good will lead to evil, while self-interested behavior will lead to good unintended results!) and a tangled mess of Adam Smith quotes to prove that capitalism does too have ethics. Basically, Sen claims that because capitalism requires mutual trust and norms in order to function, institutional structures and common behavioral codes are created and maintained. This in turn means "the developing countries have to pay attention not only to the virtues of prudential behavior, but also to the role of complementary values, such as the making and sustaining of trust, avoiding the temptations of pervasive corruption, and making assurance a workable substitute for punitive legal enforcement." Personally, I don't understand what makes capitalism so special in this regard--people have to trust each other and set up methods by which they can keep each other in check for *any* system to work. But Sen seems convinced.

The basic message I took away from this was that instead of measuring development through gains in output, income, or consumption, we should focus on how decisions are made within the society, and what opportunities and freedoms people have. Even if development organizations are only concerned with economic growth, they should keep in mind that if people lack rights (such as the right to education or reproductive control of one's own body) and freedom, economic growth will be stalled. ( )
1 vote wealhtheowwylfing | Feb 29, 2016 |
English (11)  Spanish (1)  Italian (1)  All languages (13)
Showing 11 of 11
An amazingly well thought-out treatment of economic development, its goals, its impact on people, and how those people (i.e. the human capital) feeds back into economic development. Sen is careful and thoughtful--and undogmatic--in establishing a framework by which we can enhance the freedom of individuals as well as grow economies. ( )
  qaphsiel | Feb 20, 2023 |
The book is written in 1999, so some data and examples are outdated. The impact of the book is slightly dampened by the fact that his ideas have become less controversial than they were in 1999, and are more or less incorporated in the mainstream now.

I'm not convinced by some of his points that trend a little into political theory (he paints broad strokes over libertarianism, utilitarianism and Rawlsism), in particular I find his delinking of rights with corresponding duties more of a semantical exercise than substantive. Again, this book isn't meant to be political philosophy, so those criticisms might be nitpicky, I know he tackles alot of these issues in a fuller sense in his "Idea of Justice". I find his capabilities approach, (can also be thought of as positive rights approach) idealistic, something to aspire to, even if in some senses it's more vague to pursue.

Two points I found really fascinating was his discussion on famines and interpretations of Ken Arrow's impossibility theorem. His point that modern famines are actually due to loss of entitlements to food rather than actual fall in food output is really revolutionary, and made me think of the issue in a completely new way. I also find his interpretation of the impossibility theorem, (we don't actually need complete and transitive social preferences, an idea explored in Idea of Justice), the enlargement of the informational base as a way out of the impossibility, and partial preferences extremely original and comforting. Overall I recommend this book, it's got a ton of original ideas along with more accepted ideas and is certainly an aspirational outlook for what our society could become. ( )
  vhl219 | Jun 1, 2019 |
這是一本能夠改變觀念的書,而非僅僅傳達知識的書,由印度學者Amartya Sen發表的Development as Freedom,認為讓人民享有基本的自由,是經濟發展的要素;更進一步衍申,經濟發展本身並非我們努力的目標,而是為了自由、人權等普世價值。 亞理斯多德曾說道:「財富並非我們追求的善,它僅止於有用、且是為了別的緣故而已」。經濟、發展、財富本身並非目的,它們的用途在於讓我們達到實質的自由,包括平等、人權、弱者得到照顧,讓每個人都有能力去作他認為有價值的事情,不受壓迫與剝削等等。Amartya Sen透過實證與人文精神,精闢地闡述自由的重要性。 這本書改變我看事情的視野,也深化我去看問題的本質,不會讓101大樓或火箭昇空去誤導我們的觀念,因為我們該評價的不是財富,而是分享、慈悲、為他人著想。(中譯本由商周出版) ( )
  maoozilla | Apr 2, 2019 |
This book formed the inspiration for my master's thesis, and will always hold a special place in my heart. ( )
  abergsman | Mar 20, 2018 |
This is a treatise on the importance of individual freedom, both as an end in itself and as the best means of economic development. It is based on a series of lectures Sen gave in 1996-7, which netted him a Nobel Prize in Economic Science. Nearly two decades later, all of his points seem obvious, but I bet they were revolutionary at the time. His writing is an odd mixture of turgid institutional-ese with occasional hilarious sarcastic asides or brilliantly lucid and forthright sentences. Here's an example of the prose you get upon opening this book: "[To base our choices on reason] we need an appropriate evaluative framework; we also need institutions that work to promote our goals and valuational commitments, and furthermore we need behavioral norms and reasoning that allow us to achieve what we try to achieve."

Sen credits the "fast economic progress" of East Asian and Southeast Asian economies to social reforms; he claims that in addition to social reforms having positive economic consequences, "lack of social development can quite severely hold up the reach of economic development." He references studies done in India which showed increased economic growth and overall life expectancy and decreased infant mortality and fertility rate after initiatives to improve female literacy and out-of-the-home employment. Additionally, contrasting states within India, or India vs China, show that providing agency and education to women is more effective at reducing fertility and infant mortality than coercive birth control methods. All of this is a delight to read--it's like being told one can have one's cake and eat it too.

Increased freedom and individual agency also prevents some disasters. Sen notes that expending less than 3% of the GNP, or 4-5% of national food consumption, will end a famine, so long as the arrangements are made "in good time." They can be prevented entirely through countervailing government expenditure, particularly in (temporary) job creation. He goes on to say that "Famines are, in fact, so easy to prevent that it is amazing that they are allowed to occur at all. The sens of distance between the ruler and the ruled--between 'us' and 'them'--is a crucial feature of famines."

By far my least favorite section was entitled "Social Choice and Individual Behavior," which consists of dismantling several strawmen (It is impossible to rationally derive social choices from individual preferences! All actions have unintended consequences, so trying to do good will lead to evil, while self-interested behavior will lead to good unintended results!) and a tangled mess of Adam Smith quotes to prove that capitalism does too have ethics. Basically, Sen claims that because capitalism requires mutual trust and norms in order to function, institutional structures and common behavioral codes are created and maintained. This in turn means "the developing countries have to pay attention not only to the virtues of prudential behavior, but also to the role of complementary values, such as the making and sustaining of trust, avoiding the temptations of pervasive corruption, and making assurance a workable substitute for punitive legal enforcement." Personally, I don't understand what makes capitalism so special in this regard--people have to trust each other and set up methods by which they can keep each other in check for *any* system to work. But Sen seems convinced.

The basic message I took away from this was that instead of measuring development through gains in output, income, or consumption, we should focus on how decisions are made within the society, and what opportunities and freedoms people have. Even if development organizations are only concerned with economic growth, they should keep in mind that if people lack rights (such as the right to education or reproductive control of one's own body) and freedom, economic growth will be stalled. ( )
1 vote wealhtheowwylfing | Feb 29, 2016 |
This was the first book I bought after returning home from two years overseas in 2004. It has traveled with us until now. It's probably best that I didn't read it until recently since I have a much better appreciation of the arguments.

Sen is a Nobel prize winning economist (1998), and one of my grad school teacher's teacher's teacher. He combines economic analysis with moral philosophy. His point (I think) is that freedom is both and ends and a means of development, and we should analyze policies' effects on freedom.

He delves into the philosophical problems of development. For example, material well-being can't be the best measure of economic development because American slaves had higher incomes and life expectancy than certain people in the third world today-- yet they had no freedom. We need a measure of freedom, which requires its own understandings and definitions.

Sen compares the thinking of the Scottish Enlightenment to libertarianism to Rawlsian thinking. So, there are some deep philosophical weeds to wade through. Chapter 4 is the best, dealing with issues of statism vs. markets.

Sen bases his thinking mostly on Adam Smith, and he fleshes out many of the lesser-known aspects of Smith's writings. But he also brings Eastern thought to the table in an attempt to humble Western assumptions of moral/philosophical tolerance. He debunks the idea of "Asian values" being culpable for Chinese statism but roundly points out the progress of the Chinese economically while dealing with their restrictions on freedom.

It's not a book for the non-philosophically or economically inclined. But it was good to read at this stage in my career. I'm more interested in some of his other thinking and works on development.

2.5 stars out of 5. ( )
  justindtapp | Jun 3, 2015 |
Read for class.

Very interesting book, discussing the idea of societal independence and personal freedom to be most necessary for development. Provides excellent examples and reasoning.

Finally, I'd like to add that the author sounds like a genuinely good person and I'd love to have a pleasant discussion with him over lunch. ( )
  HadriantheBlind | Mar 30, 2013 |
The overarching ideas in this book are solid. Sen argues that individual freedom is both the means and the end of economic development, and that development shouldn’t simply be measured by Gross National Product or absolute wealth levels. His economic ideas are an unexpected synthesis of Adam Smith and Karl Marx (amongst others) that result in what I’d call gentle capitalism. I appreciate both the evidence he supplies and his careful analyses of opposing viewpoints.

Unfortunately, like his biggest influences, Sen has an unrealistically rosy view of human nature. We humans may not be inherently nasty or selfish, but neither are we perfectly rational beings who always know what is best for ourselves and our neighbors. There is certainly plenty of room for improvement in the world, and I’m confident that the world is improving now thanks in part to people like Sen. However, he too often seems to ignore the difference between the way the world SHOULD be and the way the world CAN be. ( )
  ErlangerFactionless | Mar 7, 2013 |
Sen looks to lay down the theoretical foundations for a new economics of development. In some ways this is a fascinatingly ambitious work, as it really attempts to incorporate the theoretical basis of economic thought (Aristotle, Smith, Marx, Mill) as well as the latest findings. (Although since the book came out in 1998, that is less crucial.)

The theory developed in the book is that freedom isn't just a means of achieving economic development (though it is that) but should be considered as the principal goal of a countries development. That is that the success of any project of economic development should not be judged by GNP increase or level of industrialization but by the options available to the people within that society.

Sen describes the freedoms in terms of political freedoms, economic opportunities, and social opportunities. In doing this he includes access to food, education, and medical services as crucial freedoms. I suspect anyone who holds to the libertarian concept of a laissez faire economic policy might object to that, but Sen makes a strong case for why his view is closer to Smith's.

Among the topics covered: how democracies never suffer famines (though they can allow populations to experience cronic malnutrition), the important role of social constraints in economic behavior (like corruption), the importance of the education and empowerment of women to development, and challenging the believed Western monopoly on human rights.

The last one came as a particular revelation in today's political climates, when it seems to have become popular among some intellectuals to claim that Islam and/or Middle Eastern culture are completely autocratic traditions. Sen's focus is farther east, especially the Asian Tigers, since their success was shown as proof of the necessity of autocratic government for economic development. Sen points out that those making these statements often represented autocratic regimes or their allies, and gives a fair hearing to philosophical traditions of India and China vis a vis their Western counterparts to show how both democratic and authoritarian concepts have existed in those traditions.

I do have a couple of reservations about recommending the book. Though there is no math involved, there is a degree of economic theory behind it. (Such as Pareto optimality, partial ordering, etc.) The second arises from the first, since the book does deal largely in theory, those looking to get more concrete prescriptions might find it a bit disappointing.

Still, if neither of those are a turn-off, and you are interested in economic development, I highly recommend the book. ( )
1 vote CarlosMcRey | Jun 23, 2008 |
This is Amartya Sen's, Nobel Prize winner in Economics and collaborator of Martha Nussbaum, most famous work. In "Development as Freedom" he gives a broad and general overview of his views on development economics, and in particular on the priorities that must be made in creating social and economic policy in the developing world. The general thesis of the book is that many economic advisors have far too much relied on measurements of real income alone, and ignored the fact that income and wealth are a means to an end, and that this end is freedom (broadly defined as capacity); and that for this reason any policy which increases income but decreases freedom must be rejected. This thesis of itself is strong and well-made, and a deserved rebuttal to the ideas of many Asian development economists and politicians who see a right-wing dictatorship à la Lee Kwan Yew as the most effective way to create economic growth, and therefore desirable.

But that is, unfortunately, the only point of the book. Sen's actual discussion of which economic policies would lead to the results of increasing freedom is so general as to be practically unusable. He has a completely unwarranted faith in the capacity of markets (albeit interventionist ones) to create these increases in freedom, and incorrectly claims that the proof is overwhelmingly in favor of markets leading to growth on their own, when the evidence is in reality wildly conflicting and the strongest proofs are against markets. What makes this even worse is his ignorant conflating of markets as such with capitalism, which leads to such silly canards as dismissing criticisms of capitalism as not understanding freedom, since after all, what can be more free than freedom of exchange? In this way, his defense of mainstream development policy is worse than undergraduate level.

Moreover, the very greatest part of the book is filled with meaningless and saccharine rhetoric of the most astonishingly unintelligent kind. In each short chapter addressing some major aspect of development economics and its problematic, he will, after much talk, come to such stunning conclusions as "take the middle road" and "there are arguments for and against interventionism and we must consider both", as well as the whopping conclusion that we need to take the whole spectrum of effects on people into account when suggesting policies. One hardly needs to have a Nobel Prize to come to these 'insights'.

To add insult to injury, his discussion of past economic policies and economists in general is incompetent and historically dubious. He claims that no democratic state has experienced famines, but then qualifies this by excluding colonies of such states, without however giving any reason for this - creating a wholly ad hoc argument for an unproven link between 'democracy' (which apparently includes pre-Reform Bill Britain) and well-being. Similarly, he constantly cherry-picks quotes from Adam Smith to cast him as a concerned and judicious proponent of development, while a more objective look at the entirety of Smith's oeuvre would quickly reveal the degree to which he appeared as a propagandist for the Glasgow mercantile and industrial interests. It must be said in Sen's favor though that he does recognize that famines can easily occur where free markets are present, which at least puts him at a level above most apologetics for economic orthodoxy.

On the whole this book is a major disappointment. Sen's vague and hand-waving rhetoric is useless for any kind of policy purpose and yet fills most of the book, even obscuring the one point he does have about freedom as end and means. With the idea he originally had, he could have done a lot better, but his unwarranted support for mainstream economics and its equivocations has made this impossible. ( )
  McCaine | Sep 10, 2007 |
Showing 11 of 11

Current Discussions

None

Popular covers

Quick Links

Rating

Average: (3.96)
0.5
1
1.5
2 6
2.5
3 33
3.5 6
4 58
4.5 2
5 41

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 204,456,314 books! | Top bar: Always visible