An interesting read, though it does come across as biased in favour of the British as Der says. The point about Sen basing his argument on 'official production estimates' and how 'the term "production" implies final results, but clearly these data are forecasts, and not final results' (p.9) seems like splitting hairs to me. I don't know if Sen explained the limitations of this data, which seem significant according to Tauger's presentation, but use of the word 'estimates' is all I need to understand that, while not 100% accurate, they're the best info we have to go on.

Otherwise, it was enough to convince me that the cyclone and rice disease were important factors in the famine, but not that British policies of denial (only mentioned in passing), free market fundamentalism, and deliberate obstruction of relief shipments based on racist discounting of the importance of stopping starvation of Indians, didn't exacerbate the famine, albeit perhaps not causing it outright.

cheers,
I