Using The Approach: Applications
Applications
A major concern among various experts has been the operationality of Sen’s Capability Approach. Sen has strongly argued that the selection of any set of capabilities for discussion is a value judgment. Subsequently, Sen refrains from developing a list of basic capabilities. He is also reluctant in developing any “procedure for identifying which categories, and which capabilities within categories, should have priority.” As expected, Sen’s critics demand that more direction should be provided as to determine the value of capabilities. (Alkire, 2002). It is in this context that some experts have either provided applications that attempts to address the issues raised by Sen and his critics or an application that attempts to transform the approach to a paradigm.
Dimensions of Human Development
Alkire (2002) argues that it is important that dimensions be specified in order “to give secure epistemological and empirical footing to the multidimensional objective of human development.” Considering the multidimensionality of various development issues brings to bear the opportunity to make many value choices explicitly rather than depend on the market. In this manner, diverse groups in a particular society are empowered “to shape their common good.” However, the exercise of the freedom to make explicit value choices must be done cost-effectively and reliably.
Another motivation for dimensions is to identify unintended consequences resulting from the various development strategies employed. It is important to anticipate and factor such unintended consequences into a decision-making process mainly because more informed and reflective choices are made to expand the capabilities of the society. Alkire’s attempt to synthesis the works of Amartya Sen, John Finnis, Martha Nussbaum, Manfred Max-Neef, Deepa Narayan, Shalom Schwartz, Robert Cummins, and many others about determining the dimensions provides these as the characteristics of dimensions:
1) The dimensions must be valuable: they must be readily recognizable as thekinds o reasons for which oneself or others act. 2) The dimensions must “combine scope with specificity”: each dimension should be clear – which requires specificity - vague – so that persons of different cultures and values systems find them to be familiar. 3) The dimensions must be “critical” and complete:
“Basic Human Values” – John Finnis
The Capability approach has also been used in different empirical spheres. They can be categorized into five main groups:
1) Multivariate Studies: “The use of statistical techniques for simultaneous investigations of the influence of several variables.” In terms of the capability approach, these techniques identify and measure components of valuable functionings. Brandolini and D’Alesio (1998) use these techniques to explore the multidimensional analysis of deprivation and inequality. They suggest that Similarly, Chiappero Martinetti (2000) has analyzed non-income dimensions of well-being coupled with subjective perceptions on satisfaction about economic resources by respondents in her application of the Capability Approach. These studies have noted the difficulty in measuring capabilities, hence has resulted in the evaluations using approximations that describe their corresponding functionings.
2) Empirical Studies: the use of scientific methods that asserts the objective discovery of knowledge based on verifiable facts of evidence. These studies involve the use of econometrics to propose a multidimensional picture of poverty by emphasizing the target issue with respect to various indexes of specified functioning deprivations that reveal the social dimensions of poverty. For instance, Caterina R. Laderchi conducts an “empirical investigation of the difference between a capability and a monetary assessment of poverty.” Jean-Luc Dubois and Sophie Rousseau investigate on how to reduce vulnerability and prevent poverty in equitable terms by reinforcing household's capabilities
3) Case-Study Applications: Use of descriptive data to contextualize and put in evidence the complexity of a certain situation such as health care, culture, food relief, labor markets, eduction, etc. For instance, Tibandebage and Mackintosh investigate the relational activity that exists in low-income health care systems often ignored in an inputs-outputs analytical framework. They point to the need to strengthen relational capabilities that seem to depend on skills, information, procedures.
4) Theoritical Applications: use of arguments provided in Capability Approach to illuminate the analysis of situations or cases of factual interest.
5) Methodological Applications: the use of the Capability Approach framework to discuss issues that are difficult to be addressed within a utilitarian perspective such as Wendy Harcourt’s “The Capabilities Approach for Poor Women: empowerment strategies towards gender equality, health and well-being.”
Although some applications are available, the concern is the relevance of the Capability Approach as a research strategy. Comin (2001) wonders whether the results achieved through Capability Approach can be reached through other means without confronting the difficulties inherent in the approach.
Another application that takes into consideration the differences and similarities in Sen’s and Nussbaum’s theories of human development is also seen in the Human Development Index. It covers income (opportunities), life expectancy, and education that are captured in the Capability Approach.
