Durable Critique

Amartya Sen8217;s work on gender inequality is too often underplayed

BY HIS OWN ADMISSION, Amartya Sen who has highlighted significant gender concerns in his work 8212; from skewed sex ratios to 8220;cooperative conflict8221; within the family 8212; was rather late in recog-nising the importance of gender unequality. In an interview conducted by the editors of the volume under review, Sen believes that this is because gender inequality 8220;survives and flourishes8221; in a 8220;valuation mist8221;. It took a while, as well as some personal experiences 8212; especially those of bringing up two chil-dren as a single parent after his wife, Eva Col-orni, suddenly passed away in 1985 8212; to un-derstand the significance and complexity of the discriminations women live under.

The three editors 8212; including Bina Agar-wal who has done work on Indian women and land rights 8212; set out to provide a tribute to and a critique of Sen. They begin by ackno-wledging that the humanitarian approach intrinsic to his work has made a crucial con-tribution to developing several aspects of feminist economics and gender analysis. The first part of the book comprises expo-sitions on various aspects of Sen8217;s work and ideas by eminent economists, sociologists, philosophers and even an investment man-ager; the second is a collection of Sen8217;s own essays and lectures on the central theme.

Much of the effort in the first section is to extend the foundational concepts of Sen8217;s work with regard to women8217;s inequality. Fabi-enne Peter, for instance, believes that re-search in social choice theory should investi-gate ways to make social choice more responsive to issues of participation and in-clusion.

Similarly, Marianne Hill, an econo-mist, believes that while Sen8217;s capability ap-proach is valuable as a starting point, it does not go far enough in terms of taking into ac-count the impact of social power on human capabilities. Some in the volume argue that there8217;s need for an alternative paradigm to Sen8217;s language of 8220;freedom8221;, while others maintain that 8220;further levels of complexity8221; need to be added to Sen8217;s idea of freedom by testing it against empirical realities.

But it is philosopher Martha C. Nuss-baum8217;s passionate defence of her 8220;open-ended8221; list of ten human capabilities which, she believes, are 8220;central requirements of a life with dignity8221;, that forms the core of this volume. She argues that the capabilities ap-proach is useful in addressing sex equality, only if we formulate a list of basic entitle-ments without which no society can consider itself 8220;just8221;. Nussbaum8217;s capabilities list, inci-dentally, ranges from 8220;the capability of life and physical health8221; to 8220;being respected and treated with dignity8221;. Sen, on his part, has a problem with 8220;one fixed canonical list8221; of hu-man capabilities. He believes that any such list should be context specific and flexible.

Perhaps Ingrid Robeyns reads this debate be-tween the economist and the philosopher right, when she observes that their respective positions have their roots in their respective academic fields and expertise 8212; Sen8217;s, in the field of social choice; and Nussbaum8217;s, in the philosophy of the good life.

A compendium can always be critiqued for its exclusions. But all things considered, this attempt to 8220;claim8221; Sen for gender stud-ies, adds to the stature of the discipline, as it does to that of the Nobel laureate himself.