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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

4. Critiques <strong>and</strong> Debates<br />

<br />

In chapter 2 I gave an account of the capability approach that gave us<br />

a better sense of its necessary core <strong>and</strong> its scope, as well as describing<br />

the structure of a capability theory or capability analysis. While that<br />

account has aimed to be precise <strong>and</strong> comprehensive, it nevertheless<br />

raises some further issues.<br />

Hence, this chapter is focussed on investigating those further<br />

questions <strong>and</strong> debates. We will look into the following issues. Section<br />

4.2 asks whether everything that has been called a capability in the<br />

literature is genuinely so. Section 4.3 addresses a dispute that has kept<br />

capability theorists busy for quite a while over the last two decades,<br />

namely whether a capability theorist should endorse a specific list<br />

of capabilities. For many years, this was debated under the banner<br />

‘the question of the list’ <strong>and</strong> was seen as the major criticism that<br />

Martha Nussbaum had of Amartya Sen’s work on the capability<br />

approach. Section 4.4 investigates the relationship between the basic<br />

needs approach <strong>and</strong> philosophical theories of needs, <strong>and</strong> argues that<br />

the capability scholars may be able to engage more fruitfully with<br />

theories of needs. Section 4.5 asks whether, as Nussbaum suggests,<br />

we should underst<strong>and</strong> the capability approach as a theory that<br />

addresses the government; I will argue that we should reject that<br />

suggestion <strong>and</strong> also take other ‘agents of change’ into account. Section<br />

4.6 analyses a debate that has generated much controversy, namely<br />

whether the capability approach can be said to be too individualistic.<br />

<strong>The</strong> next section, 4.7, focuses on a closely related issue: the scope<br />

© 2017 Ingrid Robeyns, CC BY 4.0 https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0130.04

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!