Women's Agency/Social Progress

--I agree with Evan's conclusion about the "strong social and cultural" components of development. It is important to recognize that developing nations that achieve rapid GDP growth must also address the issue of women's agency, in addition to the issue of economic output. Likewise, countries that are crippled by stagnant growth can jump start development with social and cultural progress by empowering women.
--The notions of female "agency" and "empowerment" were pervasive in Sen's piece. However, I did not fully understand Sen's distinction between "well-being" and "agency." How would women in underdeveloped nations be "recipients of welfare-enhancing help"? What does this "welfare" look like when compared to "empowerment" through education, employment, and social status? Would a strict "well-being" policy approach emphasize health care while ignoring education and family dynamics/outdated norms? Sen does note that his thinking about "women's movement" is "a crucial addition to previous concerns," and not "a rejection of those concerns." What does this mean, precisely? If Sen is simply adding onto prior conclusions on gender equality in development, what did the "pre-Sen" doctrine look like? It seems to me as if nearly anything that raises the status of women relative to men should be considered empowerment. And this empowerment leads to a dynamic participation of women in development. How would "better treatment" or "a squarer deal" not address the issue of agency?