Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
have been proposed, especially the neo-liberal agendas of development projects
that are so dominated by new growth and market facilitation considerations. Hence
critics of these approaches maintain that although greater transparency and fair-
ness in decision-making has been achieved, they are still handicapped by the many
problems identified, so success is not guaranteed. So other approaches in the search
for redistributive justice are needed, although acknowledging that some of these
communicative ideas may still be useful in some circumstances.
3.4.2
The Capabilities Approach
The Capabilities approach arose from dissatisfaction with the mid and late twentieth
century literature that viewed human development either as a function of growth
in an economic measure such as GNP, or from utilitarian perspectives that arrive
at some summary of total satisfaction or benefits. Both use one metric for what is
a complex and multifaceted issue, ignoring the distributional and personal differ-
ences in societies that may see total wealth increase but ignore the persisting, and
often greater inequality between rich and poor. Although the Basic Needs approach
(Streeten et al.
1981
) provided an initial counterweight to these economic views of
development, it has often been criticized for over-emphasizing the
delivery of vari-
ous commodities
, rather than upon the wider problem of the well-being of individu-
als, especially the poorest. Recognition of these and other issues led to the develop-
ment of the Capabilities approach, pioneered by Sen (
1983
,
1999
) and subsequently
developed by many researchers (Clark
2005
,
2006
). This new approach has strong
links to the Rawlian ideas of justice and the human rights literature (Rawls
1971
,
2001
), as well as incorporating ideas from many classical philosophers, ranging
from Aristotle, to Adam Smith and Marx (Clark
2005
). In essence the Capabilities
Approach seeks to answer some deceptively simple questions.
What are individuals able to do, and to be?
What are the enabling factors that help them achieve these aims and live a full
life?
Rather than adding to the debate in general terms, Nussbaum (
2011
) provided a
set of specific answers to the questions, proposing that ten basic capabilities are fun-
damental to the search for a human development that improves the quality of life of
persons—for the approach is based on individuals and their problems, not groups.
Nussbaum's list of ten basic capabilities is re-arranged into a diagram in Fig.
3.2
,
showing that they can be summarized under five basic categories which may be
easier to remember, namely Life, Physical Body, Cognitive, Linkages and Control
functions. Each of these dimensions consists of one or more of the capabilities,
many of which are inter-related. Nussbaum stresses that the problem of improving
life is a pluralist one and that all ten features which improve capabilities are basic
requirements, so rather than focusing on one or two, they need to be considered as
a whole to ensure human dignity. The list shows that many of the features iden-
tified consist of what are normally considered individual freedoms in developed
