Amartya Sen and Global Justice - Book Report/Review Example

Amartya Sen and Global Justice Amartya Sen and Global Justice Introduction Global justice and the idea of basic human rights are concepts that have been eagerly debated for hundreds of years, from the great Greek and Roman civilisations to our own Western society today in reference not only to our own lives but to the lives of people living all over the world1. Amartya Sen is one of the multitude of professional idealists when it comes to global justice and human rights; he has authored many works that address the issues our economic and political world faces in the hopes that society will come to understand its role and responsibility in global human rights. This paper evaluates many of Sen's works as well as those of his contemporaries in an effort to ascertain whether Sen's arguments for what is called a Capability Approach to global justice are persuasive or merely fanciful in their idealism. Starting with an overview of Amartya Sen and his career and then addressing the Capability Approach, Sen's and other researchers' theories on human rights and global justice, and finally addressing criticisms and thoughts on how the Capability Approach should be used to reach idealistic human rights goals, this paper means to present Amartya Sen's ideas in such a way as to decide whether they might be truly effective when put directly into modern practise. As the research and evaluation concludes it seems that, like many ideas of fair economy and human rights, Sen's arguments are indeed very persuasive and only lacking in their basic inability to incorporate the theories of other economic and human rights researchers into their own framework. Sen has been able to create a widely celebrated model of social research only to stifle its creativity and success with a rigid set of principles. Amartya Sen Sen is one of the foremost theorists on the subject of justice and human rights; his works have been widely read and critiqued not only by his peers but by concerned civilians in all parts of the world. In his books Development as Freedom, Capability and Wellbeing, and Equality of What Sen has focused his intellectual energies on designing theoretical models from which he imagines people on the whole would benefit in terms of gaining access to their basic human rights like clean water, food, shelter and racial and sexual equality. Specifically, he is celebrated as the creator of the Capability Approach which will be discussed in depth shortly. An Indian economist born in 1933, Sen has lectured members of the World Bank on issues of global equality for years, and his work gained him the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences. The award is close kin to the prestigious Nobel Prize and with this kind of acknowledgement it is safe to say that Sen's work has been appreciated by the economic professionals throughout the world2. He studied in India before moving on to gain his University degrees in the United Kingdom, and since then has taught in universities in both countries. Sen is a man who has prided himself on the development of comprehensive theories for world justice and it is clear from his books that he believes it is the responsibility of people in power to make these essential changes to the world economy so that class structures are loosened and those on the bottom rung of society - be that in South Africa or Great Britain or anywhere else - are given the chance to live a full life of their own accord. His greatest opposition has come not from criticisms of his work but in fact from the relative listlessness of those people he has called upon to act in the name of human rights. Sen's strategies for change involve economic and political upheaval to the extent that government officials and business leaders simply would prefer to stay their course and continue bringing in the profits they know how to make so well3. Sen's early work focused on developing the theory of social choice, in showing that each set of voting rules encountered must inevitably in some way infringe on the very principles of democracy. From this professional starting point Sen began to explore different social systems throughout the world and wonder about the state of true global equality and human rights. He was concerned that the usual models of theoretical thought on the subject of human rights were basically flawed in their tendency to group people together into classes and other generalised groups; only through viewing each person as a purely unique individual, he thought, could social structure theory really begin to come to grips with the realities of global poverty, hunger, disease and related issues. Despite award winning theories of his own concerning global human rights, Sen has always combated those of his profession who would rather continue on with their general theories. Regardless of this fundamental resistance to change, Sen persists in his efforts to incorporate his primary theory, the Capability Approach, into world economics for the betterment of society on the whole. The Capability Approach Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum are responsible for the conception of the Capability Approach to social issues; in their book The Quality of Life, they explain how this Approach focuses on human welfare in every social system and every societal issue4. According to Sen, the value of the Capability Approach is in its ability to clearly distinguish between individuals in terms of their opportunities for work, leisure, education and other standard of living factors. The example he uses is with two people with the same job and the same wages; one is disabled and the other of average abilities. Although these two people have been able to obtain the same work and wages, Sen argues that they should not be noted as having had the same original opportunities when it came to work or other aspects of their lives. This is the essence of the Capability Approach to human rights; people are not all viewed as essentially equal as they are with so many other human rights ideologies5. With this way of looking at the world Sen stands out as having a unique set of statistical eyes; he strives to understand not only how general changes can be made to world economy to alleviate poverty and injustice, but he sets out to understand the complex dynamics between different kinds of people and their environments. Just because two people live and work in the same society doesn't mean they each have access to the same facilities and advantages that society has on offer. Essentially, the Capability Approach turns orthodox class-based ideologies of human rights access on their heads. To approach societal differences such as low-wage workers, unemployment statistics and high drop-out rates without the common theoretical class structures in place is difficult for many researchers to grasp; Sen, however, maintains that this is the only comprehensive and fair way to truly take account of what is really going on in every world society. Sen has sought to know not just why certain types of people tend to succeed financially or fail; he has designed the Capability Approach so that previously unforeseen circumstances might be discovered and better studied for use in updated social services. The Approach works very simply for those studying global human rights and social standing: researchers must look at the initial, individual factors involved in each symptom of social success or struggle. For example, Sen writes in Capability and Wellbeing that he believes (against the general consensus) that education does not have a direct effect on the status of an individual adult6. Orthodox approaches to social study will invariably point out the need for education in underprivileged communities, citing class studies instead of individual factors. Sen has maintained during his career that such generalizations can be detrimental to a social study because they fail to recognize any unique and individual factors within the class group such as health, family life, nutrition and physical characteristics. Using the Capability Approach, Sen and his colleagues aim to treat the individual instead of the class group. Similarly to the eradication of class groupings in Sen's work is the non-use of gender and race to qualify findings. The Capability Approach aims to use factors more along the lines of mental and physical disability status, intelligence and those purely individual factors that cannot easily be grouped within a society. While the individualized approach is seen as commendable by other economists and sociologists, doubts have arisen as to whether the complete ignorance of gender, race and class factors is appropriate in ascertaining the true status of a person's capability in the world. Certainly, these factors have traditionally had a great deal to do with whether or not a person has the right and drive to take up certain jobs and roles within society. During times of African slavery, for example, it was impossible for a black person to achieve the same status as a white man because he or she was not of the same class and could never hope to ascend the social chain; although such strict and legally binding class structures have littler resemblance to our culture today, class divisions remain an important part of capability-access and it is unlikely they can ever be completely disregarded in terms of social research7. This Approach assumes that poverty and all its related issues are a direct symptom of people being deprived of basic capabilities regarding work, family and leisure. After its conception, the Capabilities theory has primarily been promoted by Amartya Sen and it is more or less synonymous with his name. So what does the economist believe this theory really has to offer the world of economics and global human rights To him, the goal of the Capability Approach is first to understand what separates successful people from those suffering in poverty; and secondly, to cause change and equality worldwide. Theories of Human Rights and Global Justice in Contrast with Sen Sen's Capability Approach can really only be evaluated when taken in context with those other approaches that are in more widespread use by other economists and social researchers. To understand what sets this approach apart from the others it is necessary to consult other theorists on the issues of global justice and human rights standards. Neorealism is one of the major players in social research today, and Alan Gilbert thinks that this method has a bigger place in the future of social research than Sen's because it is not so rigid in its practise. Neorealism in research is based on what its supporters call the more logical and scientific strategies. Instead of culture or nationalism featuring heavily in neorealist study, hard factors like poverty as actually cited as reasons for the continuation of poor social systems8. Gilbert believes that it is the purely logical approach to social research that makes the difference between fanciful theories and comprehensive results that can be scrutinised for clues to the alleviation of poverty and lack of human rights in any area of the world. It is a top-down approach, meaning that the aim of the methodology is to examine societal symptoms and ascertain the causal factors; the Capability Approach works in the other direction, conversely examining what are believed to be causal factors before reaching a theory of the eventual societal symptoms (poverty, violence). Michael Doyle, cited in Alan Gilbert, wrote from a neorealistic economic viewpoint in his studies of modern democratic nations and the absence of war between them. Gilbert points out that at the time of publication, the work was thought to be merely "philosophical"9, however in time other interested sociologists and researchers realised that this was a valid work in terms of examining societal standards and justice10. The value of the work came from its interpretation of an ongoing peaceful relationship between modern Western democratic nations; in contrast Sen's Capability Approach would have investigated this state of human rights on an individualistic level and as such must be expected to have not made the same ultimate connection between allied Democratic countries and raised levels of human rights. Another theoretical approach to human rights, specifically in the case of universal health care, has been written about by Arnab Acharyna. Acharya believes that health care standards have been raised significantly over the last 100 years yet laments the fact that this change was not evenly distributed throughout the world11. Third world countries have remained out of reach of basic health care that is completely taken for granted in rich nations in the West because of internal difficulties and the basic lack of funds and structure that is necessary to instil these services into their nations. Acharya has qualified her data based on divisions that have been established by most researchers in terms of the wealth of a nation; she concludes that wealthy countries are capable of raising the standards of their health care and providing universal services to their citizens while third world countries do not have the resources necessary to follow suit. This is the kind of generalised, top-down social theory that Sen has railed himself against; he would have his readers believe that the best way to understand poor health in the individual is to look at their supposed lack of options and choices in terms of work, social services and even nationality12. Sen is convinced that the only comprehensive way to analyse failing social systems and lack of human rights is to look solely at the individual who is suffering to try to understand what this person has lacked to bring him or her to this position within a poor social system13. Instead of looking at this person as one in an entire group of people in the same situation and turning blame immediately on the social services of that country or region, Sen thinks that the clues to a fairer global system can be found in the unique characteristics of those people in need of better health care and financial social services. Instead of asking where the system has failed, Sen asks what the people could not do to make sure they had access to such things. The Capability Approach is often in danger of seeming cruel in this fundamental ideology, however it is clear from Sen's writing that he is indeed focused on the betterment of global systems and merely feels that the individualistic approach is more effective than any others he has studied. The divisive research strategies of Acharyna and other researchers like Alan Gilbert and Michael Doyle is also meant to offer the best way of looking at what can universally be accepted as a confusing global situation with many interrelated facets. They refuse to believe that the only way of looking at poverty is by examining individuals just as Sen refuses to accept that the best way of understanding the situation is by looking primarily at social service organisations and class-based tendencies and statistics. Sen has single-handedly polarised the social research world into two distinct categories with the Capability Approach and the question is not so much whether or not he is persuasive in his arguments but whether his theories can really be implemented successfully without missing elements of models like neorealism and basic generalisation and divisional statistics. Is Sen Justified in his Arguments Sen freely expresses the opinion that his work is meant to push towards global equality, but are his theories truly capable of achieving this In Equality of What He defines equality as a "utilitarian concept of goodness applied to problems of distribution"14. Distribution, then, is key to understanding Sen's motivation behind the Capability Approach. He believes that once the so-called denial of independent capabilities is fundamentally grasped he will know how to combat it and offer social stability in a completely fair way. The essential problem, as Sen understands it, is simply that distribution of basic goods and services (food, health care) is very poor although economically speaking there is plenty for everyone. Often the problem is viewed as one of sheer volume and finance, however in these terms it seems fair to say that distribution methods are what must be tackled in order to feed the world's hungry and tend to the sick15. In Equality of What the researcher addresses the fact that given surplus of both goods and money in many developed countries, greed has come in as a major factor in the denial of capabilities for poverty-stricken individuals. People without the ability to move from the lowest social ladder to a position higher up are held entirely at the mercy of those above them; as such it becomes the responsibility of business owners, governments and every other capable individual to look into ways they can help. Equality of What suggests that in today's society, most people consider themselves to be egalitarian in nature and that the real question is, what is it that should be equal It is true that things like free speech and access to health care are considered at the forefront of the word 'equality' but on the whole the individual is doing nothing to promote these things in impoverished nations aside from saying that it should be done. Can the Capability Approach be Justified by Thomas Pogge looks at how Sen's Approach steps clearly on the toes of competing social theories like neorealism and utilitarianism. Pogge feels that Sen is indeed justified in his arguments for individualistic social reform and actually that the real issue is not his theories but the mere fact that in accepting Capability Theory a researcher is supposed to abandon all other notions of the path to global equality. He wonders at the rigidity of any one theory in the face of such serious world issues and feels that if researchers are compelled to find some comprehensive data and ways to help the deprived people of the world they should be working in conjunction with one another. Elements of a Theory of Human Rights sets out six simple objectives for the sociology of economics according to Amartyr Sen: (1) What kind of a statement does a declaration of human rights make (2) What makes human rights important (3) What duties and obligations do human rights generate (4) Through what forms of actions can human rights be promoted,and in particular whether legislation must be the principal, or even a necessary, means of implementation of human rights (5) Can economic and social rights (the so-called second generation rights) be reasonably included among human rights (6) Last but not least, how can proposals of human rights be defended or challenged, and how should their claim to a universal status be assessed, especially in a world with much cultural variation and widely diverse practice16 Using these questions as a guide, one can ascertain whether or not Sen is indeed justified in his arguments for the Capability Approach. Most of these are applicable to Sen himself; they are set out so that not only the theories behind the research are firmly grounded in good intentions and understanding of global situations but so that the man himself might feel capable of achieving his goals of alleviating world poverty and spreading ideals of basic human rights worldwide. Since the first five of these specifications are related directly to Sen's own goals and ideologies as an individual, it is merely the last that relates to the Capability Approach specifically. So, Sen proposes that researchers find out just how proposals of human rights might be defended. This is fundamentally an ideological question since every theory ever conceived of depends on the consensus of its audience. As Sen believes that the main consensus of the modern world is pro-egalitarian, he has a sturdy platform from which to challenge previous social research models and offer up new alternatives for the understanding of world poverty and struggle. In answering his own question, Sen says "the universality of human rights relates to the idea of survivability in unobstructed discussion-open to participation by persons across national boundaries"17. According to this logic, he should be open to discussion with those of his contemporaries who wish to use his theories in conjunction with others already largely in practice. As Pogge has pointed out, the Capability Approach "be plausibly resolved only in conjunction with other key elements of a conception of social justice"18. Sen is so doggedly promoting the Capability Approach that he has lost sight of the basic group dynamic that he feels is so important for the betterment of social conditions in the world. Aside from this oversight, Sen has created a relatively solid framework of thought on social reform in the Capability Approach, mostly because he has decided to look at different characteristics of poverty than most researchers have ever considered before. In the scheme of furthering understanding on the subject, Sen has achieved the expansion of other forms of methodology at the very least, and at best he has pinpointed a crucial aspect of social struggle that is always present in every single case of poverty: the individual. Never before has any study focused so insistently on the unique qualities that set a person apart from every other; instead every other method of research has sought to distinguish what aspects of a person could be claimed as part of a study group. It is not as if these classifying methods do not have merit; statistics have in fact gone to prove the existence of class structures that otherwise might have been claimed as nonexistent in the Western world. Trying to understand the factors that make a social theory acceptable and worthy of challenging the status quo of study methods can be complicated, but in Sen's own terms it seems that the criteria are simply that the theories must be inherently 'good'; that is created with intentions of making the world a better place; and capable of uncovering realities that were otherwise overlooked. Does the Capability Approach achieve this Certainly the answer is yes; without the idea to look at individual characteristics researchers would have remained stuck in the orthodox methods of drawing dividing lines between their subjects and basing sociological suggestions on these very dividing lines. Sen has remembered the simple fact that humans are not always acting as a part of a group, nor are they completely without their own merit as individuals or incapable of acting with free will. The Capability Approach meets these qualifications easily in that it was created by Sen with the full intent that the information gathered on its principles would be used to change the face of the modern world into an egalitarian, realistic utopia. Both its detractors and its supporters agree that, despite certain flaws, the Capability Approach is useful in that it quite simply gives researchers a different viewpoint than those they had been trained to use. Sen wishes his model to be used to construct a "human rights-based" method to social research and capability distribution19. He wants his method to take research to a new, more informative and ultimately correct, level. The World Bank, for example, has relied completely on the data gathering methods of its social researchers, who have specialised in developing statistical information for each country in the world20. These statistics are used every day by people both within and without of the World Bank organisation for purposes as diverse as developing foreign diplomatic strategies to discovering the essential differences between certain regions of the world for research papers. The World Bank has taken on the responsibility of implementing financial aide strategies to third world countries and for sharing its information with every single country21. More than thirteen years of World Bank statistics have seen the publishing of those countries reported to be existing below the established poverty line; because of this research wealthy nations have some idea where to direct their surplus national income in the form of foreign aid. Countries like Great Britain, America, Canada and Australia are annually dedicated to sharing their own wealth with countries that have not been able to establish their own universal health care plans or even feed their own citizens due to natural disasters and faulty infrastructures. Amartyr Sen has provided World Bank researchers with the new ideas and approaches to their studies that have helped to not only define the place of the World Bank in international affairs but to give it some amount of prestige because of forward thinking. Thomas Pogge notes the fact that World Bank statistics are taken as solid fact by readers in every corner of the globe and from every walk of life, perhaps mistakenly"22. Flaws in statistics, according to Pogge, are common because of the simple fact that people do not fit easily into segregated statistical groups. Differences between study groups and shades of grey, so to speak, mean that financial and personal information gathered from subjects might be exaggerated or misleading simply to fit in with previously established statistical groups that exists merely in the mind of the researcher23. It is not as if every other method of social research were created to be divisive and ultimately indifferent to the struggle of the impoverish individual; conversely social researchers on the whole are all dedicated both to fully understanding the world and all its dynamic human parts and to bringing a better way of life to those who have not been as fortunate as some of us. The fact that Sen's arguments in favour of the Capability Approach fly in the face of statistical approaches that most researchers are used to is ultimately of little importance so long as the followers of his and all other methods realise the importance of working together for the end goal of global justice and deliverance of human rights to all corners of the globe. When Sen says that his goal is and always was equality, it dispels the belief that his allegiance lies foremost with the Capability Approach and shows that, instead, he is primarily concerned with where he believes his theories will take him. Given the essence of his remarks and theories concerning the Capability Approach, Sen is perfectly justified in his social methodology and there remains only one basic flaw in his ideology: the resistance to collaboration. Criticisms of the Capability Approach Thomas Pogge argues that while the Capability Approach has great merit on its own, it must be used in accordance with other basic social structure theories in order to be successful24. This is the foremost criticism of the Approach by its detractors and no matter how harshly they debate this point the fact remains that researchers consider themselves better off for having been exposed to Sen's ideas. Specifically, Pogge says that on its own, Sen's Approach simply doesn't get the results that the Resource Approach does; the method based primarily on class standings, gender, race and monetary statistics. Using this kind of data, Pogge suggests that an individualistic approach might be more possible than it currently is with the Capability model. Conclusions Amartyr Sen has had a hand in the conception and promotion of one of the most controversial social research theories of modern times; the Capability Approach was designed so that sociologists, economists and the like might be able to look at poverty-stricken populations with refreshed eyes that see past dividing class and racial lines and towards the individual sufferer. Sen is not alone in his wish to fully understand all the factors that make a person and a nation impoverished; he is simply unique in his view that to understand these factors one must not be bound down by nationalistic features and class structures. Sen thinks that the way towards a fairer global economy is with the Capability Approach; other researchers maintain that the divisive statistical approaches have more to offer. Based on the traditional sociological and economic methods of study plus the comments of those in Sen's field, it seems that in fact the Capability Method does have the ability to uncover new information in poor regions yet there is no real reason that this way of looking at the world cannot be used in conjunction with any other method of research. Using research methods like neorealism while simultaneously keeping the Capability Approach in mind would mean that researchers would be able not only to develop comprehensive statistical data but also to understand those unique factors that affect each person struggling with poverty and no access to social services. Sen is clearly justified in his own theories but he must learn to accept that the Capability Approach must be used with one or more other sociology methods to get results that could really alleviate overty and suffering and instil basic human rights in every country of the world. References ACHARYA, A. (2004). "Establishing a Universal Basic Health Norm", International Affairs, Volume: 18, Issue: 3. Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs. ALKIRE, (2002), Valuing Freedoms: Sen's Capability Approach and Poverty Reduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. BAKEMAN, R., (1992), Understanding Social Science Statistics: A Spreadsheet Approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. COLE, M., (2000), Education, Equality and Human Rights. London: Falmer Press. Contemporary authors, (2006), Biography - Sen, Amartya K. Thompson Gale. DYE. R., (2001), Top down Policymaking. New York: Chatham House Publishers. GILBERT, A. (1999). Must Global Politics Constrain Democracy Great-Power Realism, Democratic Peace and Democratic Internationalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press. "Global Justice", Feminist Economics, Vol. 9, Nos. 2-3 (2003): 33-59, available online at http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/human-rights/Documents/Constitutions_and_Capabilities.pdf MITZMAN, A., (2003). Prometheus Revisited: The Quest for Global Justice in the Twenty-First Century. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. NUSSBAUM, M. and SEN, A. (eds.), (1993). "The Quality of Life" Oxford: Clarendon Press. POGGE, T. "Can the Capability Approach be Justified", available online at http://mora.rente.nhh.no/projects/EqualityExchange/Portals/0/articles/pogge1.pdf. POGGE, T. and SANJAY, G., "Unknown: The Extent, Distribution, and Trend of Global Income Poverty" (2003), Available online at http://www.brookings.edu/gs/research/projects/glig/glig_pogge.pdf RAJ, D., (2003), Where Are You From Middle-Class Migrants in the Modern World. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. SEN, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. SEN, A. and NUSSBAU, M., (1993), "Capability and Well-Being. SEN, A. Elements of a Theory of Human Rights. SEN, A., "Equality of What", in Choice, Welfare and Measurement (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), also available online at http://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/sen80.pdf Read More