Abstract
In his recent work, Amartya Sen assesses markets positively because they contribute to freedom. His work on famines, however, harbours a critical stance toward markets. In this paper, I compare Sen's ‘two views’ of markets and argue that his positive assessment is untenable. Markets can undermine freedom and, to show this, I examine the effects of market-dependence in times of famine; I extend the purview of Sen's analysis to include the manner in which subsistence producers who were once relatively autonomous from markets for their survival become dependent on markets. In conclusion, I examine the normative aspects of Sen's work on famines.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
