Amartya Sen as a Neoclassical Economist

References

• Alkire, Sabina. 2002. Valuing Freedoms: Sen’s Capability Approach and Poverty Reduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arrow, Kenneth J. 1951. Social Choice and Individual Values. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Arrow, Kenneth J. 1999. “Amartya K. Sen’s Contributions to the Study of Social Welfare.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 101 (2): 163–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aspromourgos, Tony. 1986. “On the Origins of the Term ‘Neoclassical.’” Cambridge Journal of Economics 10 (3): 265–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comim, Flavio, Mozaffar Qizilbash, and Sabina Alkire. 2008. The Capability Approach: Concepts, Measures and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deneulin, Severine. 2009. The Human Development and Capabilities Approach. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Dobb, Maurice H. 1937. Political Economy and Capitalism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dobb, Maurice H. 1955. On Economic Theory and Socialism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dworkin, Ronald. 1981a. “What is Equality? Part 1: Equality of Welfare.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 10: 185–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dworkin, Ronald. 1981b. “What is Equality? Part 2: Equality of Resources.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 10: 283–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman, Milton. 1953. Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gasper, Des. 2002. “Is Sen’s Capability Approach an Adequate Basis for Considering Human Development?” Review of Political Economy 14 (4): 435–461.
   Google Scholar
• Hédoin, Cyril. 2010. “Did Veblen Generalize Darwinism (And Why Does It Matter)?” Journal of Economic Issues 44 (4): 963–989.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuklys, Wiebke. 2005. Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach: Theoretical Insights and Empirical Applications. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, Tony. 1997. Economics and Reality. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, Tony. 2002. “Should Economics Be an Evolutionary Science? Veblen’s Concern and Philosophical Legacy.” Journal of Economic Issues 36 (2): 279–292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, Tony. 2003. Reorienting Economics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, Tony. 2013. “What is this ‘School’ Called Neoclassical Economics?” Cambridge Journal of Economics 37 (5): 947–983.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, Tony. 2015. “Critical Ethical Naturalism: An Orientation to Ethics.” In Social Ontology and Modern Economics, edited by Stephen Pratten, 359–387. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, Tony. 2021. “Whatever Happened to Neoclassical Economics?” Revue de Philosophie Économique 22 (1): 1–28.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, Alfred. 1898. “Distribution and Exchange.” Economic Journal 8 (29): 37–59.
   Google Scholar
• Martins, Nuno O. 2006. “Capabilities as Causal Powers.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 30 (5): 671–685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, Nuno O. 2007. “Ethics, Ontology and Capabilities.” Review of Political Economy 19: 37–53.
   Google Scholar
• Martins, Nuno O. 2014. The Cambridge Revival of Political Economy. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Martins, Nuno O. 2015. “Veblen, Sen, and the Formalization of Evolutionary Theory.” Journal of Economic Issues 49 (3): 649–668.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, Nuno O. 2018. “The Classical Circular Economy, Sraffian Ecological Economics and the Capabilities Approach.” Ecological Economics 145: 38–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, Nuno O. 2020, “Human Development: Which Way Now?” New Political Economy 25 (3): 404–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martins, Nuno O. 2022. “Sustainability and Development Through the Humanistic Lens of Schumacher and Sen.” Ecological Economics 200: 107532.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayhew, Anne. 2016. “Lawson, Veblen and Marshall: How to Read Modern Neoclassicism.” In What is Neoclassical Economics, edited by Jamie Morgan, 119–134. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, Jamie. 2015. “What’s in a Name? Tony Lawson on Neoclassical Economics and Heterodox Economics.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 39 (3): 843–865.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, Jamie. 2016. What is Neoclassical Economics? Debating the Origins, Meaning and Significance. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, Martha, and Amartya K Sen. 1993. The Quality of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oosterlaken, Ilse. 2011. “Inserting Technology in the Relational Ontology of Sen’s Capability Approach.” Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 12: 425–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pratten, Stephen. 2021. “Veblen, Marshall and Neoclassical Economics.” Journal of Classical Sociology: 1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, Hilary. 2002. The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ragkousis, Antonis. 2023. “Critical Ethical Naturalism: Towards an Alternative Modern Aristotelianism in Ethics.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 47 (4): 853–880.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Robeyns, Ingrid. 2003. “Sen’s Capability Approach and Gender Inequality: Selecting Relevant Capabilities.” Feminist Economics 9: 61–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robeyns, Ingrid. 2005. “The Capability Approach: A Theoretical Survey.” Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 6: 93–117.
   Google Scholar
• Samuels, Warren J. 1990. “The Self-Referentiability of Thorstein Veblen’s Theory of the Preconceptions of Economics Science.” Journal of Economic Issues 24 (3): 695–718.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1970. Collective Choice and Social Welfare. San Francisco: Holden-Day.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1980. “Description as Choice.” Oxford Economic Papers 32 (3): 353–369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1982. Choice, Welfare and Measurement. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1987a. On Ethics and Economics. Oxford and New York: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1987b. “Social Choice.” In The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, edited by John Eatwell, 382–389. New York: Stockton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1992. Inequality Reexamined. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1997. “Maximization and the Act of Choice.” Econometrica 65: 745–779.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1998. “The Possibility of Social Choice.” The American Economic Review 89 (3): 349–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 1999. Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 2002. Rationality and Freedom. Cambridge Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 2004. “Economic Methodology: Heterogeneity and Relevance.” Social Research 71: 583–614.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 2005. “Walsh on Sen after Putnam.” Review of Political Economy 17 (1): 107–113.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 2008. “The Discipline of Economics.” Economica 75: 617–628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 2009. The Idea of Justice. London: Allen Lane.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K. 2017. Collective Choice and Social Welfare: An Expanded Version. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya K., Angus Deaton, and Tim Besley. 2020. “Economics with a Moral Compass? Welfare Economics: Past, Present, and Future.” Annual Review of Economics 12: 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slade-Caffarel, Yannick. 2019. “The nature of heterodox economics revisited.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 43 (4): 527–539.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, Matthew L., and Carolina Seward. 2009. “The Relational Ontology of Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach: Incorporating Social and Individual Causes.” Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 10: 213–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veblen, Thorstein. 1898. “Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 12 (4): 373–397.
   Google Scholar
• Veblen, Thorstein. 1899a. “The Preconceptions of Economic Science I.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 13 (2): 121–150.
   Google Scholar
• Veblen, Thorstein. 1899b. “The Preconceptions of Economic Science II.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 13 (2): 150–426.
   Google Scholar
• Veblen, Thorstein. 1900. “The Preconceptions of Economic Science III.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 14 (2): 240–269.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, Vivian. 1995. “Amartya Sen on Inequality, Capabilities and Needs.” Science and Society 59: 556–569.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, Vivian. 1998. “Rationality in Reproduction Models” In Conference on Sraffa and Modern Economics,: Centro Studie Documentazione “Piero Sraffa,” Rome, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, Vivian. 2000. “Smith after Sen.” Review of Political Economy 12: 5–25.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, Vivian. 2003. “Sen after Putnam.” Review of Political Economy 15: 315–94.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, Vivian. 2008. “Freedom, Value and Sen: Towards a Morally Enriched Classical Economic Theory.” Review of Political Economy 20: 199–232.
   Google Scholar