Latest news with #AmartyaSen
Time of India
14-07-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Instant Scholar: Development as freedom - an India perspective by Amartya Sen
When Nobel laureate Amartya Sen published Development as Freedom in 1999, he reshaped the global discourse on economic development. Moving away from the narrow focus on income or GDP, Sen argued that freedom is both the primary objective and the principal means of development. His thesis laid the foundation for what is now termed the capability approach, a framework that sees development as the expansion of people's capabilities—their real freedoms to lead the kind of lives they have reason to value. Nowhere is this framework more relevant than in India, a country grappling with economic disparity, social stratification, and democratic aspirations. Sen's insights, drawn partly from his own experiences growing up in British India and later as an economist engaged with policymaking, offer a moral and philosophical compass for India's journey toward inclusive development. Freedom as the Ends and Means of Development At the heart of Sen's thesis is a simple but radical idea: development is the process of expanding human freedoms. These freedoms are not just political or civil but also include economic opportunities, access to education and healthcare, social inclusion , and protective security. Sen identifies five types of instrumental freedoms: by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Dementia Has Been Linked To a Common Habit. Do You Do It? Memory Health Learn More Undo Political freedoms – Free speech, democratic participation, and accountability. Economic facilities – Access to resources, employment, and production. Social opportunities – Education, healthcare, gender equality. Transparency guarantees – Institutional openness, trust in governance. Protective security – Social safety nets for the vulnerable. These components are interconnected; for instance, education enhances economic opportunity, which in turn strengthens political participation. In India, where disparities are vast, ensuring access to these freedoms remains a central development challenge. India's Economic Growth: Unequal and Unjust? India has experienced substantial GDP growth over the past few decades, particularly after the liberalisation reforms of 1991. However, Sen cautions that growth without human development is incomplete. In his words, 'there is no automatic connection between economic growth and human freedom.' India's progress is often undermined by stark contrasts. On one hand, it is the world's fifth-largest economy; on the other, it continues to grapple with malnutrition, illiteracy, poor health outcomes, and widening inequality. The National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) reports show that over one-third of Indian children are stunted, and anemia affects more than half of women aged 15–49. Sen critiques India's overreliance on trickle-down economics, arguing that public investment in health and education has been insufficient. 'India has managed to achieve economic growth with a disgraceful neglect of the social sector,' he once noted. This mismatch is precisely what the Development as Freedom approach seeks to correct. Public Policy through the Capability Lens Sen's framework reframes the role of the state. Rather than acting merely as an enabler of market growth, the state should actively expand citizens' capabilities—what they can do and be. This implies a rights-based approach to policy design: education, healthcare, food, and employment are not handouts but entitlements. Some Indian policy innovations reflect this shift: The Right to Education Act (RTE) gave legal teeth to the notion of education as a fundamental right. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) empowered the rural poor with wage-based employment and social dignity. The Public Distribution System (PDS) and the National Food Security Act aimed to ensure food as a right, not a charity. While these policies have had implementation challenges, they represent a shift toward institutionalising freedom and capability—a central theme in Sen's work. Democracy and Public Reason in Indian Context Sen places high value on democracy not just as a form of government but as a form of public reasoning. He argues that political freedoms and open debate enable societies to prioritise people's real needs. This has direct implications for India, the world's largest democracy, where the freedom to dissent and discuss shapes the developmental agenda. A well-known illustration is his argument that famines do not occur in functioning democracies. Drawing from India's experience, Sen showed that democratic institutions—free press, electoral competition, civil society—act as checks against catastrophic failures. The Bengal famine of 1943, which occurred under British colonial rule, contrasts with India's post-independence record, where mass starvation has been largely absent despite recurring droughts. Yet, Sen warns that democracy in form is not enough. In recent years, concerns over democratic backsliding in India—curbs on press freedom, judicial independence, and civil liberties—threaten the very instruments that ensure equitable development. For Sen, democracy must remain inclusive, participatory, and deliberative, not just majoritarian. Gender Justice and Social Inclusion Another area where Development as Freedom intersects sharply with Indian realities is gender justice. Sen famously coined the phrase 'missing women' to describe the millions of girls and women whose lives are cut short due to gender-based discrimination—through sex-selective abortion, inadequate healthcare, and systemic neglect. In India, despite progress in female literacy and labour participation, deeply embedded patriarchal norms still restrict women's freedoms. The capability approach demands not only formal equality but substantive freedom—real choices and empowerment. This is seen in movements pushing for women's reservation in legislatures, greater access to healthcare, and stronger protections against gender-based violence. Sen's framework also encourages reflection on caste, tribal identity, and religion—factors that shape social exclusion in India. He calls for policies that enhance the capabilities of marginalised communities, not merely by offering quotas or subsidies but by improving foundational systems like education, nutrition, and justice delivery. COVID-19 and the Fragility of Freedoms The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare the vulnerabilities in India's developmental model. Millions of migrant workers were stranded during lockdowns, lacking basic food, shelter, or transport. The healthcare system was overwhelmed, and education access declined sharply due to the digital divide. Sen, along with fellow economist Jean Drèze, wrote during the pandemic that India needed to prioritise universal access to healthcare, employment support, and education continuity, not just economic stimulus. The crisis reaffirmed the urgency of investing in human capabilities to build a more resilient and equitable society. The Global Impact and Continued Relevance Beyond India, Development as Freedom has influenced UNDP's Human Development Index, World Bank policy papers, and numerous national development strategies. In India, its relevance has only deepened. As the country eyes a future of technological prowess and global influence, Sen reminds us that true development is not about what a country produces, but about what its people are free to become. From climate resilience to AI ethics, from rural health to urban inequality—India's policy questions today demand a framework that is moral, inclusive, and human-centred. Sen provides that foundation. Towards a Freedom-Centred Future Amartya Sen's Development as Freedom challenges India to rethink its development model—not as a race for GDP growth but as a commitment to human dignity, equality, and justice. In a country of 1.4 billion people with immense diversity and disparity, the real challenge is not just how to grow, but how to grow with freedom. India's development story will be richer and more just when it is rooted in the expansion of freedoms—for women and men, for rich and poor, for urban and rural, for all castes and communities. Sen's vision is not just an economic theory; it is a call to action for democratic India to fulfil the promises it made in its Constitution—liberty, equality, and fraternity—for every citizen. Read full text: 'Instant Scholar' is a Times of India initiative to make academic research accessible to a wider audience. If you are a Ph.D. scholar and would like to publish a summary of your research in this section, please share a summary and authorisation to publish it. For submission, and any question on this initiative, write to us at instantscholar@ Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Time of India
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
From access to agency: Uplifting India's marginalised
. India's empowerment journey is at a critical inflection point. While its developmental story often showcases soaring GDP figures and rising global stature, this progress masks a more complex reality. For millions on the margins, advancement remains a distant promise. Caste, gender, disability, religion, and sexuality frequently intersect, forging layers of exclusion that persist despite legislative guarantees. It's in these invisible trenches that the real battle for empowerment is unfolding — quiet, yet transformational. At the heart of this shift is a recalibration of what empowerment means. No longer is it just about delivering benefits. As Nobel laureate Amartya Sen and feminist scholar Naila Kabeer argue, empowerment must expand people's capabilities and life choices. That means not merely giving marginalised communities access to goods and services, but enabling them to exercise voice, agency, and dignity. India has, in recent years, initiated an array of legal and policy instruments to address entrenched inequities. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016), Forest Rights Act (2006), and Transgender Persons Act (2019) are emblematic of this shift. Schemes like MGNREGA and the Ujjwala Yojana have brought work and clean fuel to rural doorsteps. Yet implementation reveals uneven outcomes, especially among Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women with disabilities. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Secure Your Child's Future with Strong English Fluency Planet Spark Learn More Undo Bihar's Viklang Sashaktikaran Yojna and Telangana's Aasara pension scheme are examples of state-level adaptations that attempt to bridge local gaps. Civil society networks like Wada Na Todo Abhiyan monitor and pressure govts to fulfil promises, adding a layer of accountability. Meanwhile, institutions such as NITI Aayog 's SDG coordination centres are beginning to integrate community voices in planning and monitoring processes. But real change hinges on more than schemes. It requires systems that understand complexity. A tribal woman with a disability, for instance, doesn't just need a wheelchair ramp. She needs coordinated entitlements, accessible communication, and community support that acknowledges the multi-layered nature of her exclusion. Corporate India, too, is stepping in with purpose. CSR is evolving beyond cheque-writing. Projects like ITC's Mission Sunehra Kal, which has mobilised over 3.5 lakh women into self-help groups, or HUL's Project Shakti, empowering over 1.3 lakh rural women with entrepreneurship and hygiene training, are crafting new templates for inclusive growth. Vedanta's Nand Ghar and NTPC's Girl Empowerment Mission are weaving nutrition, education, and health into holistic empowerment. These initiatives are not without limitations. Intersectional targeting is still nascent. While SC/ST inclusion has improved, a closer look reveals gaps in addressing compounded vulnerabilities—say, for transgender persons with disabilities or religious minorities in remote areas. CSR interventions must therefore move from outcome counting to impact mapping, using tools like storytelling, community audits, and life histories to understand what change looks like from the ground. International partnerships add momentum. UNDP-supported projects like the Gender Seal for Development are institutionalising gender equity across health systems and skilling programmes like SMILE. A major structural reform is the govt's push for third-party evaluations of centrally-sponsored schemes, undertaken by the Development Monitoring and Evaluation Office (DMEO). These assessments are unearthing the gaps and successes that often escape attention. The convergence of law, policy, civil society, and corporate commitment offers an unparalleled opportunity. But the real test lies in embedding intersectionality — in seeing the individual not just through one identity marker but through all that shapes their lived reality. Welfare delivery must give way to systems of recognition, redistribution, and representation. Only then will India's growth story be truly inclusive, not just in charts and numbers, but in lives changed, voices heard, and futures reimagined.
Times
18-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Times
South Africa's philosopher winemaker
It's often said of a winemaker that he or she is a philosopher … but Johan Reyneke actually studied philosophy, and when you ask him about his pioneering biodynamic vineyards (the first in South Africa, which he opened back in 2007) or his winemaking techniques or his charitable work, you are as likely to hear about the Indian philosopher Amartya Sen ('if you have choices, you have power') as about grapes or vats or barrels. It isn't hard, standing in his spectacular vineyards in the Polkadraai Hills in Stellenbosch, to see why someone lucky enough to live and work here might want to protect the place. Jackal buzzards wheel, surfing the thermals. The ocean, just six miles away, breathes cool air on to the growing grapes. 'We have found lots of hand axes, made from sandstone and carried here,' he says. 'This place was special for people long before westerners arrived.' Reyneke doesn't do his protecting — or anything, really — by halves. He waves at an unplanted strip, where he has persuaded The Wine Society to fund a wildlife corridor. He talks about sustainability in this region of ancient soils and ruinous high-density grazing and waves towards the spot where he is building a smart winery, using local materials and expertise. Then he takes us back to his farmhouse, with its kitchen at one end and his artist wife's studio at the other, to taste his new wine range. Five single varietal wines, the whites from 2024, the reds from 2023 — all from vines that are regeneratively farmed and hand-harvested, then sold in lighter bottles (to lessen his carbon footprint). The sauvignon blanc is citrussy and so perfumed it could intoxicate you from a foot away. The chenin blanc, from vines nearly 50 years old, has a gorgeous flavour of lemon sponge, but without the sweetness. The syrah is all black plums and thyme, the violet-scented cabernet sauvignon needs a little time. For me, the cabernet franc was the bottle to run off and drink under one of the nearby sweet thorn trees. Leafy, packed with red fruit, subtle tannins and a mineral finish. Yum. It wasn't straightforward to get here, to this wonderful landscape and beautiful wines. Philosophy graduates do not necessarily make great winemakers. 'I knew nothing!' Reyneke says of his younger self, and he had no money either. 'I started in a little cowshed, 50 metres from here, in 1998. I did my punch-downs [the process of breaking up and submerging the solids as the wine ferments] using a broom with the bristles cut off.' The wine, he says humbly, wasn't great. At least I thought he was being humble until he pulled out a bottle of his original cuvée. Through the glass I could see something that looked like it could do with another punch-down. The cork was still in the wine. I hope it stays there. Reyneke learnt on the job. He also formed an unconventional partnership with Rudiger Gretschel of Krone, a highly accomplished winemaker who creates beautiful premium cap classiques (as South African sparkling wines are called) and now his own still wines under his Holism label, high in the Piekenierskloof hills north of Swartland. 'I wanted to learn about biodynamics and he needed to learn how to make wine,' Rudi says. It was a fair swap. His lucky break came when his mother-in-law sent a guest to the B&B he was running for a bit of extra cash. She turned out to be scouting for wines for a big press event in Johannesburg. At the end of the event — and Reyneke is still visibly moved, relating this — security men clustered at the doors and Nelson Mandela walked in. Young and awestruck, Johan joined the meet and greet and, in response to a kindly question from the great man, blurted out that he was a farmer. Then he cursed to himself. An Afrikaans farmer — what could appeal less to Mandela? 'But he smiled gently at me and said, 'Tell me, how are our farmers doing?'' That embracing kindness is something Reyneke displays too. He funds farm kids with potential to go to university. They are also trying to buy houses for workers, although he admits that this is going slowly. Still, 'this is a long-term vision brought to life,' says Valerie Lewis, the marketing director of his UK importer, New Generation. 'Reyneke has played the long game, investing in regenerative, biodynamic farming that not only produces exceptional wines, but restores the soil, supports the land and uplifts the people who work it.' When he was a young farmhand he saw vineyard workers lining their frayed shoes with paper. Now he is an admired winemaker with his name on the bottles, he hasn't forgotten that memory. 'You can't make beauty from ugliness,' he says, the philosopher peeking out again. 'I want this to be a farm wine business with a soul.' Reyneke Estate Series launched on June 3 and is available from The Wine Society (
Vox
15-06-2025
- Politics
- Vox
The stunning reversal of humanity's oldest bias
is a senior editorial director at Vox overseeing the climate teams and the Unexplainable and The Gray Area podcasts. He is also the editor of Vox's Future Perfect section and writes the Good News newsletter. He worked at Time magazine for 15 years as a foreign correspondent in Asia, a climate writer, and an international editor, and he wrote a book on existential risk. The Economist estimated that the decline in sex preference at birth in the past 25 years has saved the equivalent of 7 million the oldest, most pernicious form of human bias is that of men toward women. It often started at the moment of birth. In ancient Athens, at a public ceremony called the amphidromia, fathers would inspect a newborn and decide whether it would be part of the family, or be cast away. One often socially acceptable reason for abandoning the baby: It was a girl. Female infanticide has been distressingly common in many societies — and its practice is not just ancient history. In 1990, the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen looked at birth ratios in Asia, North Africa, and China and calculated that more than 100 million women were essentially 'missing' — meaning that, based on the normal ratio of boys to girls at birth and the longevity of both genders, there was a huge missing number of girls who should have been born, but weren't. Sen's estimate came before the truly widespread adoption of ultrasound tests that could determine the sex of a fetus in utero — which actually made the problem worse, leading to a wave of sex-selective abortions. These were especially common in countries like India and China; the latter's one-child policy and old biases made families desperate for their one child to be a boy. The Economist has estimated that since 1980 alone, there have been approximately 50 million fewer girls born worldwide than would naturally be expected, which almost certainly means that roughly that nearly all of those girls were aborted for no other reason than their sex. The preference for boys was a bias that killed in mass numbers. But in one of the most important social shifts of our time, that bias is changing. In a great cover story earlier this month, The Economist reported that the number of annual excess male births has fallen from a peak of 1.7 million in 2000 to around 200,000, which puts it back within the biologically standard birth ratio of 105 boys for every 100 girls. Countries that once had highly skewed sex ratios — like South Korea, which saw almost 116 boys born for every 100 girls in 1990 — now have normal or near-normal ratios. Altogether, The Economist estimated that the decline in sex preference at birth in the past 25 years has saved the equivalent of 7 million girls. That's comparable to the number of lives saved by anti-smoking efforts in the US. So how, exactly, have we overcome a prejudice that seemed so embedded in human society? Related The movement desperately trying to get people to have more babies Success in school and the workplace For one, we have relaxed discrimination against girls and women in other ways — in school and in the workplace. With fewer limits, girls are outperforming boys in the classroom. In the most recent international PISA tests, considered the gold standard for evaluating student performance around the world, 15-year-old girls beat their male counterparts in reading in 79 out of 81 participating countries or economies, while the historic male advantage in math scores has fallen to single digits. Girls are also dominating in higher education, with 113 female students at that level for every 100 male students. While women continue to earn less than men, the gender pay gap has been shrinking, and in a number of urban areas in the US, young women have actually been outearning young men. Government policies have helped accelerate that shift, in part because they have come to recognize the serious social problems that eventually result from decades of anti-girl discrimination. In countries like South Korea and China, which have long had some of the most skewed gender ratios at birth, governments have cracked down on technologies that enable sex-selective abortion. In India, where female infanticide and neglect have been particularly horrific, slogans like 'Save the Daughter, Educate the Daughter' have helped change opinions. A changing preference The shift is being seen not just in birth sex ratios, but in opinion polls — and in the actions of would-be parents. Between 1983 and 2003, The Economist reported, the proportion of South Korean women who said it was 'necessary' to have a son fell from 48 percent to 6 percent, while nearly half of women now say they want daughters. In Japan, the shift has gone even further — as far back as 2002, 75 percent of couples who wanted only one child said they hoped for a daughter. In the US, which allows sex selection for couples doing in-vitro fertilization, there is growing evidence that would-be parents prefer girls, as do potential adoptive parents. While in the past, parents who had a girl first were more likely to keep trying to have children in an effort to have a boy, the opposite is now true — couples who have a girl first are less likely to keep trying. A more equal future There's still more progress to be made. In northwest of India, for instance, birth ratios that overly skew toward boys are still the norm. In regions of sub-Saharan Africa, birth sex ratios may be relatively normal, but post-birth discrimination in the form of poorer nutrition and worse medical care still lingers. And course, women around the world are still subject to unacceptable levels of violence and discrimination from men. And some of the reasons for this shift may not be as high-minded as we'd like to think. Boys around the world are struggling in the modern era. They increasingly underperform in education, are more likely to be involved in violent crime, and in general, are failing to launch into adulthood. In the US, 20 percent of American men between 25 and 34 still live with their parents, compared to 15 percent of similarly aged women. It also seems to be the case that at least some of the increasing preference for girls is rooted in sexist stereotypes. Parents around the world may now prefer girls partly because they see them as more likely to take care of them in their old age — meaning a different kind of bias against women, that they are more natural caretakers, may be paradoxically driving the decline in prejudice against girls at birth. But make no mistake — the decline of boy preference is a clear mark of social progress, one measured in millions of girls' lives saved. And maybe one Father's Day, not too long from now, we'll reach the point where daughters and sons are simply children: equally loved and equally welcomed.
The Wire
10-06-2025
- Business
- The Wire
A Book Exploring Development Economics Through the Lives of South Asia's Most Consequential Economists
Former Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh (centre) and Amartya Sen (second from left), at an event in New Delhi in December 2008. Photo: Wikimedia Commons Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute Now Economic historians often tread paths heavily mined with complex, sometimes unsettled ideas and ideological conflicts. When they examine the subject's longue duré e since the Second World War – the slow evolution of development economics, its theories, structures, and processes – the journey can be quite treacherous. Tracing the development of economics and growth across post-colonial nation-states, the debates, the underlying ideas and ideologies, and the personalities of the individuals who shaped them is no easy task. It can leave the historian trapped in preference bias. David C. Engerman, the Leitner International Interdisciplinary Professor of History at Yale University, navigates many of these hazards deftly in his new book, Apostles of Development: Six Economists and the World They Made (India Viking, May 2025). The book offers a compelling description of the field of development economics and its progress over the last 75 years in South Asia. Engerman explores the ideas, debates, and conflicts that shaped development economics through the lives of six of South Asia's most consequential economists: Amartya Sen, Manmohan Singh, Mahbub ul Haq, Jagdish Bhagwati, Rehman Sobhan, and Lal Jayawardena. Apostles of Development: Six Economists and the World They Made, written by David C. Engerman, India Viking, May 2025. Photo: His selection is apt. All were born in pre-independence South Asia. Their early intellectual development was rooted in the transatlantic academic ethos of the 1950s and 1960s – Cambridge, Oxford, or MIT. Yet their willingness to shift from theoretical debates – classical, neo-classical, or Keynesian – to the grounded realities of post-colonial South Asia makes them vital figures in the history of economic thought. While exploring his choice of protagonists, Engerman writes in his introduction, 'Taken individually, each of these six made their mark on development thought over many decades – in their home countries, in South Asia writ large, across the Global South, and indeed around the world… All except Sen served in their governments at some point, each in his own way shaping the economic directions of their respective countries… Taken together, the six apostles show how much the Global South shaped the global enterprise of development.' This examination of the lives, thoughts, and impact of Sen, Singh, Haq, Bhagwati, Sobhan, and Jayawardena is not merely biographical; it offers sharp insights into their careers as highly consequential economists. The approach also serves as a useful narrative device, constructing a broad account of key events and debates in economics over the past 70 years, mainly centred on India and South Asia. A book focusing primarily on South Asia In the book's introduction, Engerman suggests that his work is about the development of economic thought in the Global South. But this claim is only partially borne out since the book focuses primarily on South Asia. It offers little discussion about the impact that experiences from other regions might have had on Engerman's six protagonists, and pays virtually no attention to the influence they may have had on development in Latin America or Africa. Engerman does clarify that the book is centred on post-colonialism, and is therefore more about South Asia than the Global South. Still, the evolution of development economics has been shaped as much by Latin America and Africa as by the post-colonial experiences of South Asia. More could have been done to explore the wider intellectual currents that shaped the six protagonists, particularly the influence of thinkers from other regions. During his tenure at UNCTAD from 1966 to 1969, Manmohan Singh worked closely with the Argentinian economist Raúl Prebisch, whose contributions to structuralist economics – including the Prebisch–Singer hypothesis and dependency theory – were foundational. A much fuller exploration of Prebisch's influence on Singh's later thinking and career would have made for compelling reading. Likewise, a more detailed account of the protagonists' engagement with thinkers such as Gunnar Myrdal, W. Arthur Lewis, Walt Rostow, and Paul Rosenstein-Rodan – and the extent to which these figures shaped their ideas – would have added depth to the book. Myrdal's work with Nicholas Kaldor on circular cumulative causation resonated with Sen's thinking. Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, too, offered instructive counterpoints, rooted in their Austrian-British and American traditions, respectively. Nevertheless, the book draws on a rich vein of historical research, making it essential reading for those interested in South Asia's economic and development history. The six protagonists have helped shape not only the contours of development theory, but also the economic trajectories of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. Sen's work, which earned him the Nobel Prize, has in many ways defined a distinctive strand of development thought in economics. Bhagwati's contributions to trade theory – and his demonstration of how tariffs and government interventions can distort welfare outcomes – remain relevant in today's conflicted, Trumpian times. Singh and Jayawardena have brought about consequential change as practitioners of the art and craft of economics, while Haq and Sobhan have done much to try and influence the economic trajectories of Pakistan and Bangladesh, respectively. The author demonstrates a solid understanding of the foundations of international economic inequality. However, Engerman excels more as a historian than as an analyst adept at exploring the philosophical influences on economists. In retracing the paths of these six figures through the hallowed halls of Cambridge in the 1950s, Engerman introduces brief but illuminating sketches of British economists such as Joan Robinson, Nicholas Kaldor, Richard Kahn, and P. T. Bauer. His portrayal of Robinson – her rejection of orthodox assumptions and her disdain for the mathematical modelling favoured by Americans – is particularly absorbing. His concise description of Bauer's early work in British Malaya, which laid the foundations for his dissenting critiques and the first development economics monograph, is equally compelling. These thinkers contributed significantly to the foundation of the field, as well as to the intellectual formation of Engerman's six protagonists. Engaging depiction of Indian economic thought in the 1960s Engerman's depiction of Indian economic thought in the 1960s, viewed through the eyes of Bhagwati, Sen, and Singh, is especially engaging and significant. His account of the period offers valuable examples of the persistent tussle between politics and economics in the Global South. One episode in India stands out as particularly illustrative of the era's political economy. It captures both the pressures that shaped the decisions of leaders such as Indira Gandhi and the challenges economists faced in steering policy. In 1966, Indira Gandhi made the politically fraught decision to devalue the Indian rupee – a move in which Bhagwati's influence was evident. The prime minister invited him to a confidential discussion. Engerman neatly sums up Bhagwati's dilemmas and his responses to political pressures. 'Yet as he (Bhagwati) recalled, the Prime Minister's interests were purely political, 'for which my economics training had not prepared me,'' Engerman writes, adding that Bhagwati 'soon enough proposed a range of possible efforts to adjust the effective value of the rupee, without necessarily taking the fraught step of formal devaluation.' Engerman's portrayal of Bhagwati as a counterweight to the more structuralist thinking of Sen and K. N. Raj at the Delhi School of Economics underscores the intellectual and contextual complexities of the time. It also highlights the spirited debates that shaped the ideological divide between the two camps and, in turn, influenced the trajectory of the Indian economy. 'The Raj-Sen model's neglect of foreign trade symbolised a broader Indian tendency to omit foreign trade from policy discussions – a phenomenon that entered the Indian economic lexicon, thanks to Singh, as export pessimism,' Engerman notes. He goes on to outline the long-term effects of India's Third Five Year Plan (1961–66), and how the divergence between the Raj-Sen model and the Bhagwati-Singh approach to trade shaped the trajectory of policy. Engerman writes: '… this strategy also produced perennial foreign exchange shortages, and thus the pressing need for foreign aid… Much as Bhagwati had observed, the Third Plan era saw new forms of domestic market regulation, and the emergence of a dynamic in which failures of regulation led to only more layers of regulation.' He notes that the phrase 'license-permit-quota raj' first emerged during this period. The inequality debates influenced economic policy across South Asia. Engerman's discussion of Bhagwati's reasoning – that inequality was not a lasting economic problem, as it would eventually diminish in line with the Kuznets curve – offers an illuminating perspective on why the argument failed to resonate in India, and how the debates were historically framed and perceived in the region. Sen's work in the 1980s, in which he developed his capabilities approach and alternative formulations of development, is engagingly recounted. As Prime Minister of India, Singh pushed through the Food Security Bill in 2013, his flagship anti-poverty programme. Engerman's account of how the Bill became 'just one skirmish in a broader battle that Bhagwati waged against Sen' – a clash over economic ideology – is compelling. Author's skills as a descriptive historian The author's skills as a descriptive historian are evident throughout the book. His portrayal of Sobhan's role in Bangladesh during the critical decade of the 1980s, and his contribution to the development of concepts such as South-South cooperation, raises interesting questions about the gains that might have accrued from true economic cooperation. Engerman's description of what he terms Sen's 'often-abstruse articles' used to introduce questions of social choice and to offer a new approach to the problems of poverty and inequality – is thought-provoking, and provides one of the few genuine glimpses into the personalities of the book's main protagonists. In the end, one might ask whether Engerman's tendency, as a historian, to focus on the minutiae of South Asia's economic development – though illuminating – distracts at times from deeper insights into the theoretical rifts of the period and the evolution of ideas within development economics, many of which remain contested. Might it have been more fruitful to delve further into the protagonists' intellectual doubts, and the global political cross-currents that shaped them? Do the minutiae of events risk overshadowing the broader evolution of ideas? Events undoubtedly shape individuals, but for the 'apostles' of development, their uncertainties, intellectual shifts, contemporary global political contexts, and evolving frameworks of thought are just as critical. Even with such reservations, the book's meticulous research, vivid narration, careful chronology, and focus on six influential thinkers – Amartya Sen, Manmohan Singh, Mahbub ul Haq, Jagdish Bhagwati, Rehman Sobhan, and Lal Jayawardena – make Apostles of Development a valuable addition to the literature on economics, economic history, and the development of ideas. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
