The entire debate on India's development policies with Sen and Dreze and Bhagavati and Panagariya on one side and the Supercraponomics research desk on the other has been watched by the world-wide economics community with great interest. We do however notice a dangerous trend of half-baked economists trying their hand at a simplistic interpretation of the debate. Sen's book titled 'India - an uncertain glory' is large and hardbound, especially if you go for the hardback edition. Bhagavati's on the other hand is available as free download illegally on some .ru website. But is that all there is by way of differences in their positions?
We will now show, through an in-depth and highly technical analysis, that the differences between the two theories are deep-rooted and sinister. Bhagavati's oft-stated position is that our population growth is a pre-requisite for happiness, while Sen believes that this growth cannot happen without some basic human capabilities, supported by healthcare. If you apply the same positions to per capita income growth, the results can be viewed simply as this self-explanatory diagram below.
Bhagavati envisages a red ring while Sen seems to have come up with an ellipse or something. It should be clear to economists now that both models have their merits that require careful consideration.
We will now show, through an in-depth and highly technical analysis, that the differences between the two theories are deep-rooted and sinister. Bhagavati's oft-stated position is that our population growth is a pre-requisite for happiness, while Sen believes that this growth cannot happen without some basic human capabilities, supported by healthcare. If you apply the same positions to per capita income growth, the results can be viewed simply as this self-explanatory diagram below.
