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.

5. Which Future for the<br />

<strong>Capability</strong> <strong>Approach</strong>?<br />

In the last two decades, much time <strong>and</strong> intellectual energy has been spent<br />

on trying to answer some basic questions about the capability approach.<br />

What difference does it make to existing normative frameworks? Can<br />

it really make a difference to welfare economics as we know it? How<br />

should we select capabilities, <strong>and</strong> how should these dimensions be<br />

aggregated? Is the capability approach not too individualistic? Can<br />

it properly account for power? And can it properly account for the<br />

importance of groups <strong>and</strong> the collective nature of many processes that<br />

are crucial for people’s capabilities?<br />

I believe that many of the debates that kept capability scholars busy<br />

in the last two decades have been settled, <strong>and</strong> we can move to another<br />

phase in developing the capability approach <strong>and</strong> using it to study<br />

the problems that need addressing. As many capability scholars have<br />

acknowledged (sometimes implicitly) for a very long time, <strong>and</strong> as this<br />

book has illustrated in detail, there are a variety of capability theories<br />

possible. As a consequence, one capability theory does not need to be<br />

a direct rival of another capability theory: we do not necessarily need<br />

to choose between them, <strong>and</strong> it will often be a mistake to see them<br />

as rivals. Many different capability theories can coexist. This theorypluralism<br />

should be embraced, rather than attacked by trying to put the<br />

capability approach into a straightjacket. <strong>The</strong>re is, of course, the real risk<br />

that any theory that is somehow ‘broadening’ the informational basis<br />

of evaluations <strong>and</strong> comparisons is seen as a capability theory — hence<br />

a real risk of inflation. However, the modular underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the<br />

© 2017 Ingrid Robeyns, CC BY 4.0 https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0130.05

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!