Expanding human freedoms for economic development<\/p>\n
The following are reflections on Amartya Kumar Sen's
\nviews on development as a process of enhancing human freedoms of
\nvarious kinds, based on his latest book Development as Freedom.
\nProf. Sen, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge University,
\nUnited Kingdom, was the first Asian recipient of the Nobel prize
\nin economics, being honored in 1998. This is the first of two
\narticles.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): In his latest book, Prof. Amartya Kumar Sen has
\npresented and analyzed in a persuasive and rigorous way his
\nconcept of development as a process of expanding the real
\nfreedoms that people can enjoy.<\/p>\n
In this approach the expansion of freedom is seen both as the
\nprimary end and the principal means of development. The intrinsic
\nimportance of human freedom as the preeminent objective of
\ndevelopment is strongly supplemented by the instrumental
\neffectiveness of freedoms of particular kinds to promote freedoms
\nof other kinds.<\/p>\n
The linkages between different types of freedoms are empirical
\nand causal, rather than constitutive and compositional. For
\ninstance, empirical evidence has indicated that economic and
\npolitical freedom help to reinforce one another.<\/p>\n
Similarly, the social opportunities of education and health
\ncare (which may require public action) complement individual
\nopportunities of economic and political participation, and also
\nhelp to foster a person's own initiative in overcoming his or her
\ndeprivations.<\/p>\n
Obviously, Sen's broad view of development contrasts with the
\nmore conventional and narrower views on development as the growth
\nof gross domestic product (GDP), rise in personal incomes, rapid
\nindustrialization and technological progress or social
\nmodernization.<\/p>\n
Sen's view on development as a process of expanding
\nsubstantive freedoms involves the removal of the major sources of
\nunfreedom, namely poverty and tyranny, poor economic
\nopportunities and systematic social deprivation, neglect of
\npublic utilities and the intolerance or overactivity of
\nrepressive regimes.<\/p>\n
Despite the unprecedented increase in material welfare,
\nincluding in many developing countries, a large part of mankind,
\nperhaps even the majority, is denied elementary freedoms.<\/p>\n
Often the lack of substantive freedoms is directly related to
\nabsolute poverty, which in some countries in sub-Saharan Africa
\nand in North Korea has manifested itself in famines, which have
\ndenied millions of people, often children, the basic freedom to
\nsurvive.<\/p>\n
Even in countries which have never experienced famine,
\nabsolute poverty has deprived vulnerable people of the freedom to
\nsatisfy their hunger or to have sufficient nutrition, to obtain
\nmedication for treatable illnesses, to have the opportunity to be
\nadequately clothed or sheltered, or to have access to clean water
\nand sanitary facilities.<\/p>\n
In other cases, unfreedom (the lack of freedom) is directly
\nrelated to a lack of public facilities and social care, such as
\nthe absence of epidemiological programs, of organized
\narrangements for adequate health care or educational facilities,
\nor of effective institutions for the maintenance of security, law
\nand order.<\/p>\n
The antifemale bias in some, often poor or traditional
\nsocieties also severely restricts the substantive freedoms that
\nwomen are entitled to enjoy. However, the freedom to seek and
\nhold jobs outside the home can contribute to the reduction of
\nwomen's relative and absolute deprivation.<\/p>\n
By holding a job outside the home and thereby contributing to
\nthe family's welfare, a woman can have a greater voice in her
\nfamily's affairs because of her greater economic independence.<\/p>\n
In still other cases the lack of freedom is the direct result
\nof the denial of political and civil rights by authoritarian
\ngovernments and by imposed restrictions on the freedom to
\nparticipate actively in the social, political and economic life
\nof the community.<\/p>\n
In several developing countries the opposition to democracy
\nand basic political and civil freedoms is often based on the
\nfollowing arguments:<\/p>\n
First, there is the claim that these political freedoms and
\nrights hamper economic growth and development. This view,
\nsometimes referred to as the \"Lee Thesis\" (after Lee Kuan Yew,
\nformer prime minister and current senior minister of Singapore),
\nis actually only backed by fairly rudimentary empirical evidence.<\/p>\n
More comprehensive intercountry comparisons have not provided
\nconfirmation of the Lee Thesis, and there is little evidence that
\nan authoritarian regime actually helps economic growth. In fact,
\nthe empirical evidence collected by Sen very strongly suggests
\nthat rapid economic growth in several developing countries was
\nprimarily caused by a favorable economic climate rather than a
\nharsh political system.<\/p>\n
Second, some advocates of authoritarian policies have claimed
\nthat if poor people are given the choice between having political
\nfreedoms and fulfilling economic needs, they will invariably
\nchoose the latter. This patronizing claim is, like the Lee
\nThesis, based on little empirical evidence. The only way of
\nverifying this claim would be to put the matter to democratic
\ntesting in free elections with freedom of opposition and
\nexpression which, however, are precisely the things that the
\nsupporters of authoritarianism, notably the government leaders in
\nmany developing countries, will not allow to happen.<\/p>\n
A third argument in favor of authoritarian policies is based
\non the claim that political freedoms, liberties and democracy are
\n\"Western concepts\" that are alien and not in accordance with
\n\"Asian values\" which, again according to Lee Kuan Yew, emphasize
\norder and personal and social discipline, rather than political
\nliberty and freedom.<\/p>\n
However, the problem with the concept of Asian values is that
\ngeneralizations about Asia are not easy, given the vast size of
\nthe continent, where about 60 percent of the world's population
\nlive. What represents the values of such a vast region, with such
\nimmense cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity?<\/p>\n
The advocates of Asian values have often tended to look
\nprimarily at Northeast Asia as the region of particular
\napplicability, including China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam, as
\ndistinct from Southeast Asia (except Singapore) and South Asia.
\nHowever, even Northeast Asia is culturally, ethnically and
\nlinguistically quite diverse. Hence, attempts at generalizations
\nabout Asian values often tend to be quite crude or just plain
\nwrong.<\/p>\n
The important role of democracy is particularly evident in
\npreventing famines from happening. In looking at the factors that
\ncould prevent famines from occurring, Sen emphasizes the
\nimportant role of democracy.<\/p>\n
In fact, the causal connection between democracy and the
\nnonoccurrence of famines is not hard to find. While famines have
\nkilled millions of people in various countries under
\nauthoritarian rule, they never kill the rulers of these
\ncountries.<\/p>\n
The presidents, kings, bureaucrats, military leaders and their
\nfamilies in nondemocratic countries hit by a famine never are
\nfamine victims. The simple reason is that in these countries
\nthose in power do not have to suffer the political consequences
\nof their failure to prevent famine, as in these countries there
\nare no free elections, no credible opposition parties and no free
\npress able to publish facts embarrassing to the government (but
\nwhich an authoritarian government could censor out).<\/p>\n
In democracies, on the other hand, famines could also affect
\nthe ruling groups and political leaders. This threat would give
\nthem the political incentive to prevent a famine from occurring.
\nAside from this, information also plays an important role in
\ndemocracies.<\/p>\n
A press free to conduct investigative reporting could
\ncontribute greatly to bringing out valuable information that
\ncould influence policies to prevent famines. The importance of
\ndemocratic freedoms is evident in comparisons between China and
\nIndia in preventing famine.<\/p>\n
While during the past half century China has made more rapid
\nprogress than India in social development, specifically in
\nproviding basic education and primary health care on a mass
\nscale, it nevertheless experienced a disastrous famine, as a
\nresult of which an estimated 30 million people died, following
\nthe failure of the Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1961.<\/p>\n
India, on the other hand, experienced famines right up to the
\ntime of independence in 1947. However, since independence and the
\nestablishment of a multiparty democratic system (a system India
\nhas been able to maintain up until the present), India has not
\nhad a famine, even though at certain times it experienced severe
\ncrop failures.<\/p>\n
Sen's analysis of development treats the freedoms of
\nindividuals as the basic building blocks. Hence, development
\nshould be seen as a process of expanding the substantive
\nfreedoms, or \"human capabilities\" (as an expression of the
\nfreedoms), that people have.<\/p>\n
This perspective of human capability is to some extent related
\nto the perspective of \"human capital\", since both perspectives
\nare concerned with the role of human beings, and in particular
\nwith the abilities that they try to achieve.<\/p>\n
The human capital perspective, however, is narrower in scope
\nas it focuses on the agency of human beings in augmenting
\nproduction possibilities, that is how they can become more
\nproductive over time and thus give a greater contribution to the
\nprocess of economic growth.<\/p>\n
Sen's perspective of human capability, on the other hand, is
\nbroader than the human capital perspective, as it focuses on the
\nability or the substantive freedom of people to lead the lives
\nthey have reason to value and to enhance the real choices they
\nhave.<\/p>\n
Sen's capability perspective involves, to some extent, a
\nreturn to an integrated approach to economic and social
\ndevelopment as expounded by Adam Smith in his books The Wealth of
\nNations and The Theory of Moral Sentiments.<\/p>\n
In analyzing the determination of production possibilities,
\nSmith emphasized the role of education as well as division of
\nlabor, learning by doing and skill formation. But the development
\nof human capability in leading a worthwhile life (as well as in
\nbeing more productive) is quite central to Smith's analysis of
\n\"the wealth of nations\".<\/p>\n
The writer is an economics historian with the Center for
\nEconomic and Development Studies, Indonesian Institute of
\nSciences (PEP-LIPI), Jakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/expanding-human-freedoms-for-economic-development-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}