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.
80 <strong>Wellbeing</strong>, <strong>Freedom</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Social</strong> <strong>Justice</strong><br />
which is a generalisation of the work by Sen together with further<br />
developments by many others. In addition, there are many dozens<br />
capability theories — about justice, human rights, social choice theory,<br />
welfare economics, poverty measurement, relational egalitarianism,<br />
curriculum design, development project assessment, technological<br />
design, <strong>and</strong> so forth. Clearly, Nussbaum has been one of the most<br />
prolific <strong>and</strong> important contributors; she has pushed the boundaries of<br />
capabilitarian theories <strong>and</strong> has rightly advanced the agenda to achieve<br />
more clarity on the essential characteristics that any capability theory<br />
should meet. However, she has offered us a more specific capability<br />
theory, rather than another version of the approach, even if it is the<br />
capability theory that is by far the most influential capability theory<br />
among philosophers. Establishing the anatomy of the capability<br />
approach <strong>and</strong> its relation to particular capability theories is very<br />
important, because it vastly exp<strong>and</strong>s the scope of the capability<br />
approach, <strong>and</strong> increases the potential types of capability applications<br />
<strong>and</strong> capabilitarian theories.<br />
In sum, there is much pluralism within the capability approach.<br />
Someone who considers herself a capabilitarian or capability thinker<br />
does not need to endorse all capability theories. In fact, it is impossible<br />
to endorse all capability theories, since different choices made in<br />
module C1 (ontological <strong>and</strong> explanatory theories that are endorsed)<br />
<strong>and</strong> module C4 (additional normative principles) can be in conflict with<br />
each other. It is presumably coherent to be a Marxist capabilitarian, <strong>and</strong><br />
it is presumably also coherent to be a libertarian capabilitarian, but it is<br />
not coherent to endorse the views taken by those two positions, since<br />
they are incompatible.<br />
<br />
conceptual elements<br />
We have now covered enough ground in underst<strong>and</strong>ing the core<br />
concepts of the capability approach to construct a visualisation of<br />
these concepts. Figure 2.1 below gives a graphical representation of the<br />
different elements of the capability approach, <strong>and</strong> how they relate. Note