Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
22
PartI.Theory
AmartyaSen’sapproach
TheleadingthinkeronthemeaningofdevelopmentisIndianeconomist
AmartyaSen,awardedNobelPrizeineconomicsin1998.Hisapproachfocuseson
humangoalsoftheeconomicdevelopmentconcept.SignificantimpactofSen’s
thoughtonboththeoryandpracticeofdevelopmentremainsundoubted.Amartya
Sen’scontributiontothewelfareeconomicsreferstopublicchoicetheory,poverty
andfaminestudies1aswellasintroductionofanewapproachtowardsmeasuring
humandevelopment(thatresultedintheintroductionofHDI-HumanDevelopment
Index).Sengavealsoanewmeaningtotheterm‘development’andhencethe
perceptionoftheprocessofeconomicdevelopmenthasbeguntobecentredon
humangoals,notcommodities.
Senrejectsincomeorutilityasapropermeasureofpovertyorhumanwell-
being.Inutilitarianism’sclassicalform,utilityisdefinedaspleasureorashappiness,
orassatisfaction.Aspectsofqualityoflife,individualfreedom,fulfilmentof
recognizedrightsarenotadequatelyreflectedintheutilitarianperspective.Inhis
bestsellingandinfluentialbookDevelopmentasFreedom,AmartyaSen(1999:62)
enumeratesthreelimitationsoftheutilitarianapproach.Atfirst,itignoresdistribution
ofutilitiessincethefocusisontotalutilityofeveryonetakentogether.Next,rights
andfreedomsareneglectedasonlythesumofhappinessisconcerned.Finally,he
pointsoutadaptationandmentalconditioning.Individual,mentalmetricofpleasure
ordesireisnotfirmasone’sdesiresandexpectationsadjusttoanactualsituationand
inthestateofdeprivationtheseexpectationsmayberelativelylow.
“Apersonwhoisill-fed,undernourished,unshelteredandillcanstillbehigh
upinthescaleofhappinessordesire-fulfilmentifheorshehaslearnedtohave
‘realistic’desiresandtomakepleasureinsmallmercies.”(Sen1985:21)
Althoughsubjectivelyoneperceiveshisorherhappinesshighly,appreciating
stronglylittlepossessionorsmallcomforts,orincomparisontotheothers,when
livinginapoorcommunity,orduetorejectionofunaffordabledesiresandpleasures,
thereisstillobjectiverealityofdeprivation.Despiteachievinghighhappiness(high
utility)adeprivedpersonwouldvalueimprovementsinhisorhercondition.
Followingthatcriticism,itisunfairtocomparehumanwell-beingordeprivation
accordingtoutilityprinciples(Sen1999:62);whatismore,improvementinutility
doesnotcapturethemeaningofdevelopment.
Whenitcomestointerpersonalcomparisonsofadvantagesbasedonincomeor
onthecommoditybasis,majorlimitationsarealsoindicated.Sen(1999:70-71)
identifiesfivedistinctsourcesofvariationbetweenrealincomesandactual
advantages-well-beingandfreedom:personalheterogeneities,environmental
1
AmartyaSen’sbookPovertyandFamines,Oxford1983,isofkeyimportancefordevelopment
economics.