Development as freedom (Denis O'Hearn's main criticism)
BY
Omar Ghareb Abo Elfotoh
(Two-semester system)
Dedicated to
Dr/Hanan Aref Qandil
Third Year
The Arab Division
Political Development
23/5/2021
introduction
Given that development is a comprehensive and broad concept, researchers are unlikely to
find a single definition of the term. Perhaps the position of freedom as a definition of the term
by Professor Amartya Sen reflects this broad picture of the term "development", but at the
same time this may make it inappropriate where The definition of a comprehensive term with
another similar to it is reflected in obscurity on both concepts, which made O'Hearn put
forward several criticisms of defining development as freedom, the most important of which
are mentioned in this article .
The Criticisms
● Sen suggests that the development process be reinforced by capitalism that is, in turn,
imbued with good values. He believes that standards such as transparency and
honesty are a product of giving individuals their freedom, so he sees that they will do
what they say, but he does not support this with the arguments that these morals will
already exist in the midst of the process. In which the individual tries to maximize his
personal benefits.
● It seems that freedom has become granted to one group without another, due to
capitalist policies that prevent the state from engaging in drawing the structure of
economic activity - because of individual freedom, of course - so we find that the
owners of large capitals are the real controllers in the functioning of the market and
that the owners of small businesses run according to a specific workplace In advance,
what can be produced and to whom it is produced, which is the opposite of the
freedom of "economic facilities" established by Sen.
● Freedom of economic facilities means granting control over services and sectors such
as electricity, water and gas to individuals within the framework of the privatization
process of basic resources, which increases the risk of interruption of these services
for the beneficiaries as they shift from basic services to profitable services, which is
what Denis considers threatening public health and life more than ever Went on.
● Sen avoids in his writings the critical analysis of the major Western countries and
their institutions, despite the fact that these countries are the cause of the largest wars
throughout history in addition to being the main cause of famine and suffering of
many poor countries that were previously considered their colonies
Conclusion
It seems that the freedom model presented by Professor Sen is an extreme trend of the
guardian state model, which has proven with the passage of time that it is not the ideal model
for state administration, as in many cases society needs the state to intervene to treat
problems such as monopoly, a large increase in prices, or the production scarcity of a specific
product. - These are problems caused by complete individual freedom - in addition to
considering that the only way to measure developmental progress is through the level of
individual freedom is imprecise. Development is a concept that includes freedom and several
other factors, which leads to the fact that Mr. Denis’s criticism was appropriate, especially
that he was in a gray area. In his criticism that he was not inclined towards the socialist state,
as Sen was strictly supportive of the guardian state, Mr. Denis relied in his criticism that
societies vary to a degree that prevents the application of the principle of "development as
freedom", as it has been applied after Western countries.
References
O'Hearn, D (2009) 'Amartya Sen's Development as Freedom: Ten Years Later', Policy and
Practice: A Development Education Review, Vol. 8, Spring, pp. 9-15.
The number of words : 560