Download amartya sen on poverty

AMARTYA SEN ON
POVERTY
INDIAN ECONOMIST | PHILOSOPHER | PROFESSOR
ARPIT JAIN | TANYA SINGH THAKUR | VINTI AGARWAL
POVERTY
• Global definition-
Poverty refers to not having enough money to meet the basic human needs; and to remain deprived
from such needs. Basic needs include access to food, clothing, shelter, education and health.
• Amartya Sen’s Definition.
He believes that poverty should not be measured on the
basis of the poverty line. Some people do have a potential
to cross the borders of poverty but are deprived of
suitable opportunities. In his book ‘Poverty and Famines’,
he highlights the various concepts of Poverty which has to
be taken under consideration for the effective
understanding of the Theory of Poverty
Source:- http://www.wrsc.org/attach_image/factorsdriving-poverty-cycle
CAPABILITY APPROACH
• Capabilities denote what people really “can do and can be”. The freedom to choose from what
real opportunities and options a person have with respect to the life he/she leads is inherent
in the definition of capability.
• He believes that Poverty must be seen as the deprivation of basic capabilities rather than
merely taking into consideration the income aspect.
A person who is suffering from disability is adversely
affected from competing with the able bodied person
in respect of earning as much income as him.
According to government of India Rs 447 per
month in rural areas is upper limit for Poverty
Line. This might be valid for a normal healthy
person but a differently abled person cannot
survive in the same amount of money. Hence
it is important to consider the capabilities of a
person for determining poverty.
CAPABILITY APPROACH
Capability deprivation aspects-
Resources
(Characteristics of
goods available)
1.
Mortality Rate
2.
Morbidity
3.
Undernourishment
4.
Medical neglect
5.
Gender bias
6.
Cultural identity and social belonging.
7.
Social backwardness
Capability set
(functioning available
to choose from)
Functioning
achieved
Utility
(subjective wellbeing)
Personal ‘utilization function’
(depending on interpersonal differences:
physiology, physical and social environment)
We support the capability approach of Amarteya Sen’s on poverty because we feel that giving a larger share of
income to a person with more needs due to his disability may be against the principle of equalizing incomes,
but it is in total agreement with the rules of economic equality, since the persons greater need for economic
resources due to his disability has to be taken into consideration in judging the requirement of economic
Equality.
Poverty is Deprivation of Basic Capabilities
Poverty must be seen as the deprivation of basic capabilities rather
than merely the lowness of incomes. – Amartya Sen
“I am Expanding my Capabilities !”
Income alone can’t map the whole
landscape of multidimensional poverty.
For instance, in India over 50% of all
malnourished children come from non
poor families. When the Indian
government claims that the poverty is
down to 22% or 29% it tells nothing about
the state of deprivations poor people are
facing.
Image Source:http://hubpages.com/education/Amartya-SensConcept-of-Development-and-Poverty
Approach of his predecessors
• Rowntree’s Absolute Poverty Approach
In this approach Rowntree only focuses on the individual income
of a person to determine how poor a person is. Other aspects like
age, the type of society the person belongs to, physical and
mental health etc. are not taken into consideration
• Townsend’s Relative Poverty Approach
Unlike Rowntree, he takes into account the public participation.
However his focus also lies only on the resources. If a person’s
resources fall short than he would be considered to be suffering
from poverty
• Amartya Sen Capability Deprivation Approach.
Amartya Sen came up with the capabilities deprivation approach
in which he involved factors like age of the person, various
mental and physical health problems the person is suffering from,
social biases the person is facing in the society he resides in, etc.
Thus the real poverty lies in terms of capability deprivation rather
the reduction of income and it is also region specific.
Source :- http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.in/2012/06/just-dont-call-itpoverty.html
• Gender bias• There is an inherent gender bias in the distribution of resources. This results in
the neglecting of the female members.
• Social belongingA person who is relatively poor in a rich surrounding suffers from a great
capability handicap even though his income is high with regards to the
general world standards. They are not given equal opportunities to
participate in social processes and activities. This is an example of absolute
deprivation in respect of capabilities.
Social backwardness• The ability to earn income by a disabled person is reduced due to his medical
situation. However he would require more income to achieve the same
functioning as an able-bodied person.
The Government of India has opened many schools in Rural Areas in order to educate the children of that
region but many children who belong to lower caste are not allowed to attend classes because of the
social backwardness hence the scheme fails. So it is important to consider the approach of Amarteya Sen
on poverty.
In the year 1993-1994 when the government was considering poverty in terms of only per capita income
then the percentage of poverty was 25-35% but in the year 2009-2010 when the government started
considering poverty in terms of other factors like health, education, job creation, social equality etc.
then the percentage of poverty significantly started to reduce in the country. Let us look at Kerala as an
example. The percentage of literacy in Kerala in the year 1994 was 85% and by the year 2010 the literacy
rate was 93%. Poverty in Kerala in the year 1994 was in the range of 25-35 % and by the year 2010 it was
less than 15%. Hence increase in literacy rate resulted in reduction of poverty.
How Rich Countries may have Poor Quality of Life?
Per capita GDP is the common way to compare countries. It is
expected that economic growth should make people’s life better but
the relationship between per capita GDP and quality of life is not
straightforward. For example, Sri Lanka and the Indian state of Kerala
have low per capita GDP but have higher life expectancies and
literacy rates than richer countries like Brazil and South Africa.
Likewise, the African Americans in the US have lower life expectancy
than China or Kerala despite higher average income.
The GDP income can remain concentrated in few hands due to
nature of the economy and exclusionary forces.
The rich elites influence state policies in their fever which leaves
ordinary citizens at disadvantage.
Source: http://hubpages.com/education/Amartya-SensConcept-of-Development-and-Poverty