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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2. Core Ideas and the Framework 31 If the capability approach is an open framework, then what are the ways in which it has been closed to form more specific and powerful analyses? Scholars use the capability approach for different types of analysis, with different goals, relying on different methodologies, with different corresponding roles for functionings and capabilities. Not all of these are capability theories; some are capability applications, both empirical as well as theoretical. We can observe that there is a rich diversity of ways in which the capability approach has been used. Table 2.1 gives an overview of these different usages, by listing the different types of capability analyses. Normative theorising within the capability approach is often done by moral and political philosophers. The capability approach is then used as one element of a normative theory, such as a theory of justice or a theory of disadvantage. For example, Elizabeth Anderson (1999) has proposed the outlines of a theory of social justice (which she calls “democratic equality”) in which certain basic levels of capabilities that are needed to function as equal citizens should be guaranteed to all. Martha Nussbaum (2006b) has developed a minimal theory of social justice in which she defends a list of basic capabilities that everyone should be entitled to, as a matter of human dignity. While most normative theorising within the capability approach has related to justice, other values have also been developed and analysed using the capability approach. Some theorists of freedom have developed accounts of freedom or rights using the capability approach (van Hees 2013). Another important value that has been studied from the perspective of the capability approach is ecological sustainability (e.g. Anand and Sen 1994, 2000; Robeyns and Van der Veen 2007; Lessmann and Rauschmayer 2013; Crabtree 2013; Sen 2013). Efficiency is a value about which very limited conceptual work is done, but which nevertheless is inescapably normative, and it can be theorised in many different ways (Le Grand 1990; Heath 2006). If we ask what efficiency is, we could answer by referring to Pareto optimality or x-efficiency, but we could also develop a notion of efficiency from a capability perspective (Sen 1993b). Such a notion would answer the question ‘efficiency of what?’ with ‘efficiency in the space of capabilities (or functionings, or a mixture)’.
32 Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice Epistemic goal Methodology/discipline Role of functionings and capabilities Normative theories (of particular values), e.g. theories of justice, human rights, wellbeing, sustainability, efficiency, etc. Philosophy, in particular ethics and normative political philosophy. The metric/currency in the interpersonal comparisons of advantage that are entailed in the value that is being analysed. Normative applied analysis, including policy design. Applied ethics (e.g. medical ethics, bio-ethics, economic ethics, development ethics etc.) and normative strands in the social sciences. A metric of individual advantage that is part of the applied normative analysis. Welfare/quality of life measurement. Quantitative empirical strands within various social sciences. Social indicators. Thick description/descriptive analysis. Understanding the nature of certain ideas, practices, notions (other than the values in the normative theories). Qualitative empirical strands within various humanities and social sciences. Conceptual analysis. Elements of a narrative. Used as part of the conceptualisation of the idea or notion. [Other goals?] [Other methods?] [Other roles?] Source: Robeyns (2005a), expanded and updated. Examples Sen 1993b; Anand and Sen 1994; Crabtree 2012, 2013; Lessmann and Rauschmayer 2013; Robeyns 2016c; Nussbaum 1992, 1997; Nussbaum 2000; Nussbaum 2006b; Wolff and De-Shalit 2007. Alkire 2002; Robeyns 2003; Canoy, Lerais and Schokkaert 2010; Holland 2014; Ibrahim 2017. Kynch and Sen 1983; Sen 1985a; Kuklys 2005; Alkire and Foster 2011; Alkire et al. 2015; Chiappero-Martinetti 2000. Unterhalter 2003b; Conradie 2013. Sen 1993b; Robeyns 2006c; Wigley and Akkoyunlu-Wigley 2006; van Hees 2013. [Other studies may be available/ are needed.]
Page 1 and 2: Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justi
Page 4 and 5: Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justi
Page 6 and 7: Contents Acknowledgements 3 1. Intr
Page 8 and 9: 3. Clarifications 89 3.1 Introducti
Page 10: 4.7 What about power and political
Page 14 and 15: Acknowledgements In 1998, when I st
Page 16 and 17: Acknowledgements 5 the capability a
Page 18 and 19: 1. Introduction Many people who en
Page 20 and 21: 1. Introduction 9 capability approa
Page 22 and 23: 1. Introduction 11 Moreover, it bri
Page 24 and 25: 1. Introduction 13 Countries Outsi
Page 26 and 27: 1. Introduction 15 capabilities of
Page 28 and 29: 1. Introduction 17 their collaborat
Page 30 and 31: 1. Introduction 19 This book has a
Page 32 and 33: 2. Core Ideas and the Framework Th
Page 34 and 35: 2. Core Ideas and the Framework 23
Page 92 and 93:
2. Core Ideas and the Framework 81
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98:
Page 101 and 102:
90 Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Ju
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
100 Wellbeing, Freedom and Social J
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 262 and 263:
Index abortion 15, 145 advantage 25
Page 264 and 265:
Index 253 Fleurbaey, Marc 154 flour
Page 266 and 267:
Index 255 political institutions 14
Page 268:
Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justi
show all

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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?