A capability approach for seismic risk analysis and management - Seismic Risk Analysis and Management of Civil Infrastructure Systems - page 256

the pursuit of certain functioning may foreclose others. With limited eco-
nomic resources, devoting resources to secure shelter may limit the extent
to which an individual can be adequately nourished. This example also
highlights the importance of security or stability in what an individual is
able to do or become (Wolff and de-Shalit 2007). For example, when limited
economic resources are available through temporary employment, the
security with which an individual can be sheltered may be undermined. In
this case, the capability of an individual to be sheltered is diminished.
Choosing appropriate capabilities for risk determination
and measurement
A risk analysis cannot take into consideration the impact of a hazardous
scenario on every capability of an individual. Choices must be made regard-
ing which capabilities, and so which dimensions of well-being, will be taken
into account. There are fi ve general criteria that should guide the selection
of capabilities (Gardoni and Murphy 2009). First, a selected capability
should be relevant , in the sense that it is a capability that a given hazard
typically affects. A selected capability should be important , in the sense that
it refers to a state or activity that are signifi cant enough to infl uence recov-
ery and mitigation policies. Third, a selected capability should be infl uence-
able ; that is, we can alter the consequences of a given hazard on that
capability through mitigation action. Fourth, a capability should provide
information that is not captured by those other capabilities. Fifth, the fewest
possible capabilities should be selected, consistent with providing a compre-
hensive picture of the impact of a hazard on a community. This enhances
the practical implementability of the capability approach.
Choosing appropriate indicators
Once capabilities are selected, they must then be quantifi ed (Gardoni and
Murphy 2010), or in the case of risk analysis the change in each capability
must be predicted. Indicators provide information about whether, and to
what extent, a given functioning (e.g. being adequately nourished) is
achieved. For example, one possible indicator for being adequately nour-
ished is average caloric intake. A possible indicator for being educated is
the percentage of children enrolled in school. However, indicators only
capture the actual achievement while capabilities refer to the potential
ability to achieve if an individual decides to do so (Robeyns 2006; Wolff
and de-Shalit 2007). Murphy and Gardoni (2010) developed a peer method
to gauge the capabilities of individuals by looking at the achieved function-
ings of other individuals in the same societal group. This is based on the
assumption that even if an individual chooses not to achieve a functioning