Cultural Diversity and the Capability Approach

In this chapter I turn to one specific interpretation of the framework considered so far: the capability approach. By drawing on the analysis conducted in this book I shall discuss the question whether the capability approach can account for cultural diversity. In a first step, I explore how cultural differences may affect the construction of capability sets. In a second step, I turn to their ranking, and draw on discussions about the value of alternatives in freedom rankings in order to explore how different ways to identify valuable functionings can affect the extent to which capability rankings can account for differences in the conception of well-being across different cultures. In a last step, I draw on Sen’s contributions in rational choice theory in order to illustrate how certain norms can render the value of functionings dependent on the capability set of which they form a part. I illustrate that existing contributions fail to account for such cases of context-dependency, and propose a way to refine the framework such that they can be taken into account. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the role of freedom’s agency value in allowing the capability approach to find a delicate balance in the evaluation of well-being across different cultures: namely to avoid the problem of preference adaptation it was meant to address, without becoming paternalistic. This chapter is a modified version of Binder (Context dependency of valuable functionings: how culture affects the capability framework. In: Chiappero-Martinetti E (ed) Debating global society: reach and limits of the capability approach. Fondazione Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, Milan, pp 205–232, 2009).

[1]  H Schmutterer,et al.  Properties and potential of natural pesticides from the neem tree, Azadirachta indica. , 1990, Annual review of entomology.

[2]  Ian Carter IS THE CAPABILITY APPROACH PATERNALIST? , 2014, Economics and Philosophy.

[3]  A. Sen,et al.  Commodities and Capabilities , 1987 .

[4]  Amartya Sen,et al.  Welfare, preference and freedom , 1991 .

[5]  J. Clapp,et al.  Development as freedom , 1999 .

[6]  A. Sen JUSTICE AND IDENTITY , 2014, Economics and Philosophy.

[7]  Martin van Hees,et al.  The specific value of freedom , 2010, Soc. Choice Welf..

[8]  A. Sen,et al.  Capability and Well-Being , 1991 .

[9]  Ian Carter,et al.  A Measure of Freedom , 1999 .

[10]  Wulf Gaertner,et al.  Never choose the uniquely largest a characterization , 1996 .

[11]  Martha Craven Nussbaum,et al.  Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership , 2006 .

[12]  I. Robeyns The Capability Approach in Practice , 2006 .

[13]  R. Claassen Making Capability Lists: Philosophy versus Democracy , 2011 .

[14]  Amartya Sen,et al.  INTERNAL CONSISTENCY OF CHOICE , 1993 .

[15]  S. Alkire Valuing Freedoms: Sen's Capability Approach and Poverty Reduction , 2002 .

[16]  C. Binder,et al.  A capability perspective on indigenous autonomy , 2016 .

[17]  M. F. Byskov The Capability Approach in Practice: A New Ethics in Setting Development Agendas , 2018 .

[18]  A. Sen,et al.  FREEDOM OF CHOICE: CONCEPT AND CONTENT , 2008 .

[19]  Robert Sudgen,et al.  The Metric of Opportunity , 1998, Economics and Philosophy.

[20]  Peter Evans,et al.  Collective capabilities, culture, and Amartya Sen’sDevelopment as Freedom , 2002 .

[21]  I. Robeyns Please Scroll down for Article Journal of Human Development the Capability Approach: a Theoretical Survey the Capability Approach: a Theoretical Survey , 2022 .

[22]  C. Puppe An Axiomatic Approach to “Preference for Freedom of Choice” , 1996 .

[23]  Prasanta K. Pattanaik,et al.  On Preference and Freedom , 1998 .

[24]  V. Tucker A Cultural Perspective on Development , 1996 .

[25]  A. Sen,et al.  Maximization and the Act of Choice , 1997 .

[26]  W. Bossert,et al.  Ranking Sets of Objects , 2001 .

[27]  V. Shiva North‐South Conflicts in Intellectual Property Rights , 2000 .

[28]  Amartya Sen,et al.  Resources, Values and Development. , 1985 .

[29]  Antonio Romero-Medina,et al.  More on preference and freedom , 2001, Soc. Choice Welf..

[30]  A. Sen,et al.  Rationality and Freedom , 2002 .

[31]  M. Nussbaum,et al.  Book reviews , 2002 .

[32]  P. Pattanaik,et al.  On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Terms of Freedom of Choice , 1990, Recherches économiques de Louvain.

[33]  J. Russell Land and Identity in Mexico: Peasants Stop an Airport , 2003 .

[34]  C. B. Binder,et al.  Context dependency of valuable functionings: how culture affects the capability framework , 2009 .

[35]  Robert Sugden,et al.  Welfare, Resources, and Capabilities: A Review [Inequality Reexamined] , 1993 .

[36]  D. Clark Sen's capability approach and the many spaces of human well-being , 2005 .

[37]  Clemens Puppe,et al.  Essential alternatives and freedom rankings , 2010, Soc. Choice Welf..

[38]  A. Sen,et al.  Well-Being, Agency and Freedom the Dewey Lectures 1984 * , 1985 .

[39]  C. Hampden-Turner,et al.  Riding the Waves of Culture. Understanding Cultural Diversity in Business (3rd ed) , 1993 .

[40]  R. Sugden Capability, happiness and opportunity , 2008 .

[41]  A. Sen,et al.  The idea of justice , 2009, Princeton Readings in Political Thought.

[42]  James E. Salzman Thirst: A Short History of Drinking Water , 2005 .

[43]  David A. Crocker,et al.  Ethics of Global Development: Agency, Capability, and Deliberative Democracy , 2008 .

[44]  Amartya Sen,et al.  The Concept of Development , 1988 .

[45]  K. Watene Valuing nature: Māori philosophy and the capability approach , 2016 .

[46]  Amartya Sen,et al.  Welfare, Freedom and Social Choice: a Reply , 1990, Recherches économiques de Louvain.

[47]  R. Sugden Commodities and Capabilities , 1986 .

[48]  Ingrid Robeyns,et al.  Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined , 2017 .

[49]  Amartya Sen,et al.  World, Mind, and Ethics: Is the idea of purely internal consistency of choice bizarre? , 1995 .

[50]  A. Sen,et al.  Freedom, Capabilities and Public Action: A Response , 1996 .