Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Capabilitarianism

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This paper offers a critique of Martha Nussbaum’s description of the
capability approach, and offers an alternative. I will argue that Nussbaum’s
characterization of the capability approach is flawed, in two ways. First, she unduly limits the capability to two strands of work, thereby ignoring important other capabilitarian scholarship. Second, she argues that there are five essential elements that all capability theories meet; yet upon closer analysis three of them are not really essential to the capability approach. I also offer an alternative description of the capability approach, which is called the cartwheel view of the capability approach. This view is at the same time radically multidisciplinary yet also contains a foundationally robust core among its various usages, and is therefore much better able to make the case that the capability approach can be developed in a very wide range of more specific normative theories. Finally, the carthwheel view is used to argue against Nussbaum’s claim that all capabiliarian political theory needs to be politically liberal.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)397-414
JournalJournal of Human Development and Capabilities
Volume17
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Keywords

  • Capabilities
  • Capability Approach
  • Amaryta Sen
  • Martha Nussbaum
  • political liberalism
  • ethics
  • political philosophy
  • welfare economics
  • interdisciplinary research
  • evaluations

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Capabilitarianism'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this