06.09.2021 Views

Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice The Capability Approach Re-Examined, 2017a

Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice The Capability Approach Re-Examined, 2017a

Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice The Capability Approach Re-Examined, 2017a

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

142 <strong>Wellbeing</strong>, <strong>Freedom</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Social</strong> <strong>Justice</strong><br />

the disciplines that have built most expertise in large-scale adaptation<br />

processes, such as sociology <strong>and</strong> social policy studies. Based on the<br />

insights from those disciplines, we know the likely c<strong>and</strong>idates to be<br />

dimensions of adaptation — such as social class, caste or gender. We can<br />

then use indicators of those dimensions to study whether preferences<br />

<strong>and</strong> aspirations systematically differ, as in the earlier mentioned study<br />

by Tania Burchardt (2009). But it is clear that this can only help us to<br />

identify adapted preferences or adapted aspirations; it will not always<br />

tell us whether for each application it is possible to ‘launder’ the data so<br />

as to clean them from processes of unjust adaptations.<br />

<br />

explanatory theory?<br />

In almost all capability applications <strong>and</strong> theories, the capability<br />

approach is developed for conceptual <strong>and</strong> normative purposes, rather<br />

than for explanations. If it is used for conceptual work, then capability<br />

theories do not explain poverty, inequality, or wellbeing, but rather<br />

help us to conceptualize these notions. If capability analyses are used<br />

for normative work, then they help to evaluate states of affairs <strong>and</strong><br />

prescribe recommendations for intervention <strong>and</strong> change.<br />

Nevertheless, the notions of functionings <strong>and</strong> capabilities in<br />

themselves can be employed as elements in explanations of social<br />

phenomena, or one can use these notions in descriptions of poverty,<br />

inequality, quality of life <strong>and</strong> social change. In those cases, the<br />

properties A1 to A4 from module A would still hold, but characteristics<br />

A5 (functionings <strong>and</strong> capabilities as the evaluative space), A6 (other<br />

dimensions of intrinsic values can be important for normative analyses)<br />

<strong>and</strong> A7 (normative individualism) are not applicable.<br />

To the best of my knowledge, few scholars use the capability<br />

approach in this way. Probably this should not be surprising, since the<br />

capability approach may not make a significant difference to this type of<br />

work. Still, there are parallels with existing studies. For example, there<br />

is a large literature on the social determinants of health (e.g. Marmot<br />

2005; Wilkinson <strong>and</strong> Marmot 2003; Marmot et al. 2008). <strong>The</strong> goal here<br />

is to establish a set of functionings related to the general functioning<br />

of being healthy, <strong>and</strong> the determinants are investigated so that social

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!