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
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 />
173<br />
Sen wants his version of the capability approach to have any bite for<br />
addressing issues of social justice, he has to endorse one specific <strong>and</strong><br />
well-defined list of capabilities.<br />
Sen does not accept the stronger critique as it applies to particular<br />
capability theories. <strong>The</strong> reason is the importance he attaches to agency,<br />
the process of choice, <strong>and</strong> the freedom to reason with respect to the<br />
selection of relevant capabilities. He argues that theory on its own is not<br />
capable of making such a final list of capabilities (Sen 2004). Instead, Sen<br />
argues that we must leave it to democratic processes <strong>and</strong> social choice<br />
procedures to define the distributive policies. In other words, when<br />
the capability approach is used for policy work, it is the people who<br />
will be affected by the policies who should decide on what will count<br />
as valuable capabilities for the policy in question. This immediately<br />
makes clear that in order to be operational for (small-scale) policy<br />
implementation, the capability approach needs to engage with theories<br />
of deliberative democracy <strong>and</strong> public deliberation <strong>and</strong> participation.<br />
Sen’s response to the strong critique can be better understood by<br />
highlighting his meta-theoretical views on the construction of theories,<br />
<strong>and</strong> theories of justice in particular. One should not forget that Sen is<br />
predominantly a prominent scholar in social choice theory, which is<br />
the discipline that studies how individual preferences <strong>and</strong> interests<br />
can be combined to reach collective decisions, <strong>and</strong> how these processes<br />
affect the distribution <strong>and</strong> levels of welfare <strong>and</strong> freedom. Sen published<br />
ground-breaking work in social choice theory before he started working<br />
on the capability approach, <strong>and</strong> he has never ceased to be interested in<br />
<strong>and</strong> to contribute to social choice theory. 2 Sen’s passion for social choice<br />
theory is also a very likely explanation for his critique of the dominant<br />
forms of contemporary theories of justice, which, he argues, focus on<br />
describing a utopian situation of perfect justice, rather than giving us<br />
tools to detect injustices <strong>and</strong> decide how to move forward to a less<br />
unjust society (Sen 2006, 2009c).<br />
According to my reading of Sen’s work on capability theories <strong>and</strong><br />
applications, he is not against the selection of dimensions in general, but<br />
rather (a) against one list that would apply to all capability theories <strong>and</strong><br />
2 Sen was also awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize for his contributions to social<br />
choice theory <strong>and</strong> welfare economics. For some of his work on social choice theory,<br />
see Sen (1970a, 1970b, 1976, 1977b, 1979, 1983, 1986, 1992c, 1999c, 2017).