MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996360519 · doi:10.1080/09538250903391988

Starvation and Social Class: Amartya Sen on Markets and Famines

2009· article· en· W1996360519 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Peacock

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Political Economy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsNormativeFamineSubsistence agricultureWork (physics)Positive economicsNeoclassical economicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Political EconomySame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207