Skip Navigation

Cambridge Journal of Economics 2005 29(6):1145-1170; doi:10.1093/cje/bei081
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Prendergast, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow B31 - Individuals
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved.

Article

The concept of freedom and its relation to economic development—a critical appreciation of the work of Amartya Sen

Renee Prendergast*

* Queen's University, Belfast

Address for correspondence: School of Management and Economics, Queen's University, Belfast, UK; email: R.Prendergast{at}qub.ac.uk

Abstract

Following a brief review of the conception of freedom as employed in economic discourse, this paper focuses on the evolution of the concept of freedom in the work of Amartya Sen. It traces the development of Sen's thought from the capability analysis of the late 1970s to his more recent separation of freedom into its opportunity and process aspects. While broadly appreciative of Sen's development of the concept of positive freedom, the paper identifies some difficulties arising from his definition of capability as a set of options as well as from his separation of the opportunity and process aspects of freedom. Aspects of the relationship between Sen's conception of freedom and that of Marx are discussed briefly in the context of Sen's recent discussion of the market as a source of freedom.

Key Words: Freedom • Functioning • Capability • Opportunity • Process • Markets • Sen • Marx

JEL classifications, B2, B3, B4, D6, O1

Manuscript received February 16, 2004; final version received April 1, 2005.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.