Capability and Learning to Choose

The Capability Approach (henceforth CA) is in the first place an approach to the evaluation of individual well-being and social welfare. Many disciplines refer to the CA, first and foremost welfare economics, development studies and political philosophy. Educational theory was not among the first disciplines that took notice of the CA, but has a rising interest in it. This paper argues that the CA would also profit from looking into educational theory. The first part of the paper shows why and where educational theory—or more precisely: a theory of learning—is missing in the CA. This is done in three steps: the first section gives a brief overview of the core concepts of Sen’s CA. Section “Capability and Choosing” focuses on the role of choosing in the CA. It states the views of Sen and Nussbaum on choosing and shows the shortcomings in their appreciation of choosing. In consequence, the third section derives some demands on a theory of learning in the CA. The second part of the paper presents Dewey’s educational theory on experience as a possible starting point when looking for a learning theory that lends itself to the integration in the CA. Section “Opportunity of Choosing, Experience and Education” introduces Dewey’s conception of experience, freedom of the learner, conditions of experience and education. Section “Capability and Experience” discusses how Dewey’s concepts fit into the CA. On the first glance, there are three points in which the CA and Dewey’s concepts match: the importance of freedom for human life, the role of participation in education and the need to take internal and external factors as well as their interaction into account in assessing choice situations. This establishes a basis for linking both theories. Yet, more research is needed to explore the issue further. Section “Conclusion and Outlook” concludes and sketches the lines for future research.

[1]  Tonlieu Ludovic Lado,et al.  Sen, Amartya Development as Freedom . New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1999. , 2001 .

[2]  Ingrid Robeyns,et al.  An Unworkable Idea or a Promising Alternative? Sen's Capability Approach Re-examined , 2000 .

[3]  K. Basu Achievements, capabilities and the concept of well-being , 1987 .

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

[5]  Amartya Sen,et al.  Rights and Capabilities , 1985 .

[6]  R. Sugden,et al.  The Quality of Life. , 1994 .

[7]  Amartya Sen Resources, Values, and Development , 1985 .

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

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

[10]  David A. Crocker,et al.  Functioning and Capability , 1992 .

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

[12]  Amartya Sen,et al.  The Standard of Living: Contents , 1987 .

[13]  Jonathan Glover,et al.  Women, Culture, and Development , 1995 .

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

[15]  Des Gasper,et al.  Sen's capability approach and Nussbaum's capabilities ethic , 1997 .

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

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

[18]  Alexander L. Kaufman Capabilities and Freedom , 2006 .

[19]  M. Nussbaum Nature, Function and Capability: Aristotle on Political Distribution , 1988 .

[20]  J. Dewey Experience and Education , 1938 .

[21]  P. Hammond,et al.  Handbook of Utility Theory , 2004 .

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

[23]  Gerald Allan Cohen Equality of What? On Welfare, Goods and Capabilities , 1990 .

[24]  Ingrid Robeyns,et al.  Selecting Capabilities for Quality of Life Measurement , 2005 .