Showing papers by "Amartya Sen published in 2014"
Book•
22 Jul 2014TL;DR: The Arrow Impossibility Theorem as mentioned in this paper was proposed by Amartya Sen and has been studied extensively in the last few decades, including in the context of social choice and majority rule.
Abstract: AcknowledgmentsIntroduction, by Prasanta K. PattanaikPart 1: The Lectures Opening Remarks, by Joseph E. StiglitzArrow and the Impossibility Theorem, by Amartya SenThe Arrow Impossibility Theorem: Where Do We Go From Here?, by Eric MaskinCommentary, by Kenneth J. ArrowPart II: Supplemental Materials The Informational Basis of Social Choice, by Amartya SenOn The Robustness of Majority Rule, by Partha Dasgupta and Eric MaskinThe Origins of the Impossibility Theorem, by Kenneth J. ArrowNotes on Contributors
37 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: Dreze and Sen as discussed by the authors argue that India's main problems lie in the lack of attention paid to the essential needs of the people, especially of the poor, and often of women.
Abstract: When India became independent in 1947 after two centuries of colonial rule, it immediately adopted a firmly democratic political system, with multiple parties, freedom of speech, and extensive political rights. The famines of the British era disappeared, and steady economic growth replaced the economic stagnation of the Raj. The growth of the Indian economy quickened further over the last three decades and became the second fastest among large economies. Despite a recent dip, it is still one of the highest in the world. Maintaining rapid as well as environmentally sustainable growth remains an important and achievable goal for India. In An Uncertain Glory, two of India's leading economists argue that the country's main problems lie in the lack of attention paid to the essential needs of the people, especially of the poor, and often of women. There have been major failures both to foster participatory growth and to make good use of the public resources generated by economic growth to enhance people's living conditions. There is also a continued inadequacy of social services such as schooling and medical care as well as of physical services such as safe water, electricity, drainage, transportation, and sanitation. In the long run, even the feasibility of high economic growth is threatened by the underdevelopment of social and physical infrastructure and the neglect of human capabilities, in contrast with the Asian approach of simultaneous pursuit of economic growth and human development, as pioneered by Japan, South Korea, and China. In a democratic system, which India has great reason to value, addressing these failures requires not only significant policy rethinking by the government, but also a clearer public understanding of the abysmal extent of social and economic deprivations in the country. The deep inequalities in Indian society tend to constrict public discussion, confining it largely to the lives and concerns of the relatively affluent. Dreze and Sen present a powerful analysis of these deprivations and inequalities as well as the possibility of change through democratic practice.
26 citations
TL;DR: The great poet and novelist Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941) once remarked that he was extremely sad that he had not been alive when Gautama Buddha was still around as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The great poet and novelist Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941) once remarked that he was extremely sad that he was not alive when Gautama Buddha was still around. Tagore very much wished he could have had conversations with Buddha. I share that sentiment, but, like Rabindranath, I am also immensely grateful that, even now, we can enjoy—and learn from—the ideas and arguments that Buddha gave us twenty-five hundred years ago. Our world may be very different from what Buddha faced in the sixth century bce, but we can still benefit greatly from the reasoned approach to ethics, politics, and social relations that Gautama Buddha brought to the world of human understanding.
12 citations
22 Jul 2014
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors pay tribute to Arrow's path-breaking "impossibility theorem, for which Arrow managed to find, in line with his sunny temperament, a rather cheerful name: "General Possibility Theorem." This result, and with it the formulation of the demands of mathematical social choice theory, were real watersheds in the history of welfare economics as well as of voting theory and collective choice.
Abstract: 1 It is wonderful for me to have the opportunity of paying tribute to Kenneth Arrow, who is not only one of the greatest economists of our time, but also one of the finest thinkers of our era. That itself makes the occasion very special for me, but on top of that, it is marvellous that I have the company of Eric Maskin, with whom I used to teach a much enjoyable joint course on social choice theory at Harvard, until he deserted us for the Institute for Advanced Study. And it is very pleasing for me to have Joe Stiglitz as the participating chair of the meeting (having known Joe for many years, I could assure the audience that there was no danger of Joe being an aloof chair), and it is very good to know that Akeel Bilgrami's intellectual vision is behind the planning of this event. I am in admirable company, and I begin by expressing my appreciation of that, but most especially by thanking Ken Arrow himself, for making us all think in new lines, and personally for me, for being such a major influence on my own intellectual life. I shall be particularly concerned in this lecture with Arrow's path-breaking "impossibility theorem," for which Arrow managed to find, in line with his sunny temperament, a rather cheerful name: "General Possibility Theorem." This result, and with it the formulation of the demands of mathematical social choice theory, were real watersheds in the history of welfare economics as well as of voting theory and collective choice. The informational foundation of modern social choice theory relates to the basic democratic conviction that social judgments and public decisions must depend, in some
11 citations
[...]
TL;DR: The authors discusses the relationship between justice and identity and concludes that it is critically important to pay attention to every human being's multiple identities related to the different groups to which a person belongs; the priorities have to be chosen by reason, rather than any single identity being imposed on a person on grounds of some extrinsic precedence.
Abstract: This paper discusses the relationship between justice and identity. While it is widely agreed that justice requires us to go beyond loyalty to our simplest identity – being just oneself – there is less common ground on how far we must go beyond self-centredness. How relevant are group identities to the requirements of justice, or must we transcend those too? The author draws attention to the trap of confinement to nationality and citizenship in determining the requirements of justice, particularly under the social-contract approach, and also to the danger of exclusive concentration on some other identity such as religion and race. He concludes that it is critically important to pay attention to every human being's multiple identities related to the different groups to which a person belongs; the priorities have to be chosen by reason, rather than any single identity being imposed on a person on grounds of some extrinsic precedence. Justice is closely linked with the pursuit of impartiality, but that pursuit has to be open rather than closed, resisting closure through nationality or ethnicity or any other allegedly all-conquering single identity. Christian List
11 citations