Marginal Revolution: Questions about Sen

November
S	M	T	W	Th	F	St
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

« Where does Wal-Mart get its products? | Main | Susan Athey wins the John Bates Clark Award »

Questions about Sen

Ingrid at CT received a query, here are my answers in bold:

1. How has Sen’s thought changed traditional development? We have a better sense of how real income measures don't estimate capabilities very effectively in some cases, plus we've learned how much democracy holds famines at bay. Sen also drew attention to the problem of "the missing women" in the Third World, namely the possibly tendency of families to take better care of sons than daughterse or to selectively abort.

2. How has his thought affected on development frameworks and fields?See #1.

3. How is his thought evaluated? Sen has won a Nobel Prize in economics. His writings have influenced the practice of development economics in the field, plus he had a big impact on "social choice theory," most of all showing how efficiency may conflict with key values of liberty and autonomy ("the Paretian Liberal Paradox")

4. Is Sen’s thought practical and feasible in the development projects? If it is not practical or feasible, what would be the cause? Sen's measure of capabilities -- a kind of positive liberty -- can be hard to make operational, but in the field boosting health and literacy first -- and real income second -- does have more than a theoretical meaning. Try visiting Kerala.

5. If there any shortcoming of Sen’s thought or his theory, what would it be? Sen does not place enough stress on the ability of large-scale commercial institutions or capitalism to elevate people from poverty. He still has some of the socialist biases of the Bengali intelligentsia.

6. Will be it possible for Sen’s thought ( in particular, capability approach) to be accepted and adopted as the main concept in international development in the future? It is already part of the mainstream. But there is no "the main concept" in such a diverse field.

7. Is there any concept or thought which replaces Sen’s thought? Or is there any concept or thought which was affected by Sen’s thought and which has made Sen’s thought more effective? Sen's work, according to some, has been strengthened by incoporating the philosophical perspectives of Martha Nussbaum. In my view Sen's thought starts too much with his philosophical opponents (crude economism) and not enough with the poverty problem itself. I'd like to see more analysis of trust and institutions, other than democracy and certain kinds of aid. See also #5. Emily Oster's work is an important revision to Sen's claims about the missing women.

I could say more, but I am at a Marriott in Indianapolis. Here is Wikipedia on Sen.

Posted by Tyler Cowen on April 20, 2007 at 03:30 PM in Economics | Permalink

Comments

I am glad somebody answered those question. It was bugging me.

Posted by: joeo at Apr 20, 2007 4:27:34 PM

Well done.

Posted by: Fred at Apr 20, 2007 4:40:15 PM

Sen's brilliance shines in every thing he touches. He is, in my opinion, able to go after the big questions in economics and come up with better answers than almost anyone. He should be read, and read carefully. For example, early work on Harrod's growth theory captures the essential point of Harrod's model (still an important insight despite its neglect by today's economists). He also has a relatively early piece on Marx's labour theory of value which is probably the best in the literature. When he eventually turned his attention to social choice and welfare economics (a literature which tries to rigorously take on the problem of defining the what is "good" for "society") he makes contribution after contribution.

If you are an economist you know much of his work focuses on the problem of aggregation (an issue which is the Achilles heal of much of economics and which economists often avoid by assuming representative individuals, assuming capital can be treated as a simple homogeneous and easily defined phenomona, assuming that expectations (forecasts of future events) are the same for all, etc.). His contribution in social choice/welfare economics is to identify ways we might be able to get arround the problem of aggregating preferences(Arrow's theorem) by broadening the information base.

But, IMHO, the most important thing about Sen is that he is a Wayne Gretsky academic (I am a Canadian and a hockey player who was born with seven instead of five senses is a useful point of reference, Tyler might prefer to cite other people with seven senses such as Mozart or Degas, but my real point is that Sen has a brain which works in ways normal human beings can aspire to but never reach). The great thing about being an economist is that questions addressed by economics have attracted many of the the most innately brilliant people in human history and Sen is one of these. Moreover, he has devoted his life to thinking about the problem of creating a better world while simultaneously trying to hold anyone who wants to talk about " a better world" accountable for their definition of what a better world really means.

Has he found the "holy grail"? No. But anyone searching should read every thing he has written (since it will reveal your errors and help provide direction.) Still his recent popular publications are among the best of his career. He seems to want to make a difference in the real world (i.e beyond the academic world) and, in particular, his work in economic development is practical but not formulaic. Most critics, who are unfamiliar with the way he thinks and of the way his earlier work feeds his pop work, don't really get it. But an average reader can get a lot.

Read every thing by Sen you can and you will appreciate his pop work to the full. But if you don't have the tools (mathematics is his languange) read his pop work deeply and you will get some understanding of his points. But alas, there is no simple answer to the basic question (how do we improve the position of the "poor"through concrete policy instruments?) and Sen does not claim to provide one.

Posted by: Frank at Apr 20, 2007 4:42:18 PM

Tyler,

I don't understand the stuff about Kerala. Weren't they a rather rich province before they went socialist? How about a comparison with West Bangel, which was poor before it went socialist? I always thought the stuff about Kerala was a little bit of a trick.

What one might say, however, is that it is hard to know how much to invest in public goods. Maybe Kerala had a high demand and a high supply. But that seems largely coincidental and may have been better under more liberal conditions (with more negative liberty, that is).

I'm sometimes a philosophy graduate student who's read a bunch of Sen. His stuff on macroeconomics and ethics just seems like bad philosophy. The way he draws inferences seems undersupported. For instance, the evidence he actually provides doesn't seem to rule out alternative explanations. Perhaps democracies and famine-relief both evolve out of countries with a tradition of the rule of law. I'm surprised you didn't mention this.

Posted by: The Octagon at Apr 20, 2007 7:10:47 PM

Point No.4: As a Keralite, I agree.But I think "capabilities", "missing women", "entitlement" etc are only fashinable terms.Of course, Sen's social choice theory is great.

The octagon,

We Keralites were poor when we opted and elected a communist govt in 1957.There are numerous books on "Kerala Economy" (for example, the one published jointly by the Tilberg University, Netherlands and the Cochin University recently). The stuff about Kerala is not a trick.

Posted by: GVV at Apr 20, 2007 7:47:52 PM

Octagon -- you are mistaken.

GW is right. Kerala was not rich when it elected a communist government. Poverty reduction, healthcare provision and education have improved drastically and quickly without significant economic growth. This was also the case in Chine pre-reforms (i.e. pre 1970s)

Posted by: Gautam Rao at Apr 20, 2007 8:03:14 PM

speaking as a philosopher I would say that Nussbaum's changes to Sen's capabilities approach don't seem like improvements to me. I don't find the Aristotelian framework plausible as descriptive view and think it makes it worse as political philosophy and public policy. I don't think this is a very widely held view but my opinion would be that Sen's original take was better than Nussbaums's adaption of it.

Posted by: Matt at Apr 20, 2007 10:45:24 PM

I dont know about Kerala being a trick. But there are some cultural and historical factors about Kerala, which are less pronounced further North.

1. Kerala (or the erstwhile Travancore state) had very enlightened rulers in the 19th century and later. These rulers provided for state supported education for children (0ne of them was a major classical music composer as well in his spare time), especially girls. Below is a link about one of them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swathi_Thirunal_Rama_Varma

2. Sections of Keralite society have a strong matriarchal tradition.

3. By virtue of its geographical position in the deep South, Kerala was among the most stable regions in India, politically and otherwise. This stability became more fragile as one went further North in the subcontinent.

4. History also seems to indicate (especially in India) that there is a strong correlation between stable political systems, institutions and progressive policies. It seems to me that the former are crucial for "positive liberty", since health and literacy and everything else are apparently secondary effects.

Posted by: kri at Apr 21, 2007 6:17:20 AM

I'd thought that the Oster work on missing women hadn't... held up so well.

Posted by: Jacob T. Levy at Apr 21, 2007 8:13:43 AM

Kri,

Kerala does not represent earstwhile Princely Travancore astate alone.It consists of earstwhile Travancore princely State, earstwhile Cochin princely State and Malabar province of British India where the prominent earstwhile rulers were the Zamorin kings.People in this region in the peninsular India speak the language Malayalam.

Posted by: GVV at Apr 21, 2007 1:12:19 PM

GVV,
Enough of your self-promotion. Now please shut up.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward at Apr 21, 2007 2:39:21 PM

An. Coward,
No self-promotion.B'cause I am only a reader, a student. I was making a clarification.That is all.I don't gain any thing more than that. I wanted to make a point clear.You have no right to order me or shout at me or make personal comments.Be democratic, have patience to hear other people's opinion also.

Posted by: GVV at Apr 21, 2007 6:30:08 PM

Well, I can't claim to know much about Kerala, I do have experience in the factory floor in Bangadesh. I would say that it is not the "socialist intellectuals" that are holding back the economy, it is a lack of basic industrial and technical skills. I was surprised to find basic tech functions being carried out by Sri Lankans!

Posted by: Robb Lutton at Apr 22, 2007 8:06:59 AM

Jacob,

I've heard the same thing about Oster's results. I understand Ebenstein, a young grad student out of Berkeley, has analyzed some data that casts serious doubt on the Hep B hypothesis.

Posted by: Darren at Apr 22, 2007 6:29:24 PM

GVV,
I am well aware of what is spoken in Kerala, and that the erstwhile Travancore state is only a part of modern Kerala.

That being said, my point was that the institutional history of a state is of primary importance in determining its developmental trajectory. In my opinion, developments in health and literacy are not very sustainable in the absence of the former.

Posted by: Kri at Apr 22, 2007 9:49:12 PM

Kerla is one third Christian (this community is of long standing).
That explains why Kerla differs from
the rest of India.

The Communists have made it a great deal worse. Now people emigrate out of kerla
and nobody migrates in.

Posted by: Bisaal at Apr 23, 2007 2:49:07 AM

Kerala's society survives as a cargo cult. It produces little or no net wealth year-on-year, but is sustained by it's diaspora who travel the rest of India and Persian Gulf/Middle-East as skilled manual labor and clerical / other low-end white-collar work. Kerala is the largest receiver of remittances from it's diaspora among Indian states.

Of course the Communists caused this! They encouraged indiscriminate demands by unionized agricultural workers to the point that land owners find it profitable to let the land fallow and emigrate in search of jobs. The most fertile agricultural area in India is a net importer of basic foodstuff! The urban trade unions enforce worker "solidarity" with incredible savagery. The political violence of educated but under-employed youth, whose life is subsidized almost entirely by the remittances of their families living far away is legendary in India.

Kerala is *not* some kind of heaven that he makes it out to be. Is the average person educated, healthy and not impoverished? Of course - among the highest standards of life in India. Almost entirely subsidized by external remittances. (Note: NOT TRADE!)

Did some mythical Government investment in "healthcare" and "education" make this happen? Hell no ! The average "liberal" in Kerala, as elsewhere, can afford to hold his/her opinions as free riders on someone else's money.

Posted by: Sri at Apr 23, 2007 12:11:29 PM

Bisaal,
Communists did some wonderful things in Kerala.
It is the Christian neo-rich NRIs who are making money and monopolise business along with some rich NRI muslims.They claim that they are minorities,lest they create millions.Their minority capital supported by strong and powerful religious lobbies create enclave economies.
The majority Hindus are marginalised, pauperised and thrown out of the mainstream.That is why Kerala is backward-the proletarianisation of the majority Hindus who are being humiliated everyhere.

Posted by: Samy at Apr 25, 2007 11:18:08 AM

大家好，我是臺灣人，從臺灣一個人搬家來到美國，環境很陌生，感覺很孤單。以前在臺灣幾家知名的徵信社工作過，我是一個優秀的徵信工作者，希望早點找到適合自己的工作。希望通過貴站，認識更多的朋友。

Posted by: 謝文豪 at Apr 2, 2008 2:40:04 AM

Bvlgari Jewelry
Replica Bvlgari Jewelry
Bvlgari Replica Jewelry
Gucci Jewelry

Posted by: aion kina at Mar 19, 2009 9:12:35 PM