Search results

Intro -- Preface -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- About the Author -- 1 Introduction: Purpose and Summary -- 1.1 Purpose and Four Tasks -- 1.1.1 Reflections on the Significance of the Capability Approach in the History of Economic Theory -- 1.1.2 Theoretical and Mathematical Formulation of the Capability Approach -- 1.1.3 Exploration of the Methodological Framework for the Capability Approach -- 1.1.4 Re-examination of Equality in Light of the Capability Approach -- 1.2 Summary of Each Chapter -- 2 Welfare Economics and the Capability Approach -- 2.1 Historical Inquiry into the Capability Approach -- 2.1.1 Introduction: Origins of the Capability Approach -- 2.1.2 Measurement of Real National Income -- 2.1.3 Criticism of "Welfarism" -- 2.1.4 Normative Economics: Ethics in Economics -- 2.1.5 Summary -- 2.2 Philosophical Inquiry into the Capability Approach -- 2.2.1 Extended Welfare Space and Multi-Layered Preference Evaluations -- 2.2.2 Re-Examination of Freedom as an Opportunity Set -- 3 Specification and Measurement in the Capability Approach -- 3.1 Similarities and Differences in Individual Capabilities -- 3.1.1 What Matters? -- 3.1.2 Liberal Equality Versus Diversity-Based Equality -- 3.1.3 Division Rules for the Equality of Differences -- 3.1.4 Diversity as a Fact and Equality as a Norm -- 3.2 Preliminary Investigations for Modeling Individual Capability -- 3.2.1 Basic Formulation of the Capability Approach (Sen 1985a) -- 3.2.2 Estimation of Unobservable Capability from Observable Functioning Vectors -- 3.2.3 Inter-Personal Comparison -- 3.2.4 Setting up the Functioning Space: Selecting a List of Functionings -- 3.3 Towards Practical Application of the Capability Approach -- 3.3.1 What Matters Again -- 3.3.2 An Example -- 3.3.3 Practical Meaning of the Concept of Capability -- 3.3.4 Procedures to Form Social Evaluation.

Conventional practice within the United Kingdom and beyond is to conduct economic evaluations with "health" as evaluative space and "health maximization" as the decision-making rule. However, there is increasing recognition that this evaluative framework may not always be appropriate, and this is particularly the case within public health and social care contexts. This article presents a methodological case study designed to explore the impact of changing the evaluative space within an economic evaluation from health to capability well-being and the decision-making rule from health maximization to the maximization of sufficient capability. Capability well-being is an evaluative space grounded on Amartya Sen's capability approach and assesses well-being based on individuals' ability to do and be the things they value in life. Sufficient capability is an egalitarian approach to decision making that aims to ensure everyone in society achieves a normatively sufficient level of capability well-being. The case study is treatment for drug addiction, and the cost-effectiveness of 2 psychological interventions relative to usual care is assessed using data from a pilot trial. Analyses are undertaken from a health care and a government perspective. For the purpose of the study, quality-adjusted life years (measured using the EQ-5D-5L) and years of full capability equivalent and years of sufficient capability equivalent (both measured using the ICECAP-A [ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults]) are estimated. The study concludes that different evaluative spaces and decision-making rules have the potential to offer opposing treatment recommendations. The implications for policy makers are discussed.

Thanks to the Capability Approach it is possible to travel from a space characterized by goods, income, utility, to a space where the foundational elements of liveability are located. Capabilities appear as means on the basis of which it is possible to evaluate the quality of life as well as the individual and social well-being. Therefore, agency, well-being and standard of living are complex concepts that, although deriving from classical political economy, can still fertilize the specific soil of education. This affects not only the quality of life of individuals in terms of economic well-being, but also their development as subjects of learning, education, and training. ; Attraverso il Capability Approach è possibile transitare dallo spazio delle merci, dei redditi, delle utilità, allo lo spazio degli elementi costitutivi del vivere.Le capacità si configurano come mezzo sulla base del quale valutare la qualità della vita e il benessere individuale e sociale. Agency, well- being e standard of living sono concetti complessi che sebbene risalenti alle teorie dell'economia politica classica, riescono a fertilizzare anche il terreno specificatamente educativo. Ciò incide direttamente non solo sulla qualità della vita di un individuo in termini di benessere economico, ma anche sul suo sviluppo quale soggetto di apprendimento, educazione e formazione.

AbstractTrauma‐informed practice has been developing for decades, though much remains unknown regarding how it is understood and practised. Drawing upon focus group data from an evaluation of a trauma‐informed approach (TIA) implemented by an organisation in Southeast England, this paper provides a unique perspective of 31 staff members and 18 young people. Results indicate how choice and control, key elements of a TIA, align with the Capability Approach (CA). The CA is then used as a novel analytic framework to examine the data. A 'Trauma‐Informed Capabilities Approach' is introduced as a holistic, person‐centred way of conceptualising young trauma survivors' well‐being.

Chapter 1. Introduction -- Chapter 2. The AgeCap conceptual framework for research on capability in ageing -- Chapter 3. The ICECAP-O measure -- Chapter 4. The capability approach in epidemiological studies -- Chapter 5 – Good self-rated health as an indicator of personal capability in old age -- Chapter 6. Capability in research on cognition and well-being in ageing and retirement -- Chapter 7. The neurochemistry of Alzheimer's disease: one of the most common causes of reduced capability in the adult population -- Chapter 8. The capability approach in research on ageing well at home for frail older people -- Chapter 9. eHealth literacy and capability in the context of the pandemic crisis -- Chapter 10. Increasing people's capabilities by using design thinking in the decision-making process -- Chapter 11. The capability approach in social work with older people -- Chapter 12. A historical perspective on ageing and capability -- Chapter 13. The capabilities approach and the concepts of self-determination, legal competence and human dignity in social services for older people -- Chapter 14. Invisible or powerful? Ageing in a mediatised society -- Chapter 15. System and life-course perspectives on capability to work and capability through work -- Chapter 16. Organisational capability for delayed retirement -- Chapter 17. Capability and political participation among ageing populations.

Given the continuing interest in multi-dimensional approaches to poverty, the article considers ways in which Senian capability indicators can be used to assess and understand poverty and deprivation. More specifically, we develop novel capability data on 29 dimensions for adults from the US, UK and Italy to explore three core research questions. First, we show that when poverty is seen as capability deprivation, different individuals are identified as poor compared with approaches based on low income or subjective wellbeing. However, we also observe that what the poor report being able to do or otherwise is, nonetheless, it is relatively robust to the use of these three different approaches. Second, we employ latent class analysis to identify poverty and deprivation profiles for groups within society and suggest that such profiles help to identify groups who are deprived or socially excluded with respect to some but not all areas of life. Third, and finally, we examine the association between individual capability deprivation and local area deprivation in the UK. We find that individual capabilities are associated with local area deprivation in some cases but that the connections vary significantly depending on the dimension under consideration. We discuss the results and conclude by suggesting that capability indicators can provide insights into poverty which do not emerge from a more traditional approach focusing on income alone.

Many philosophical ideas of the American philosopher Martha Nussbaum are relevant and widespread in contemporary ethics and political philosophy. The most notorious of her theoretical ideas is her capability approach, designed to achieve basic human capabilities and to ensure respect for human dignity and a minimum level of social justice. The first problem considered in this article is the status of neo-Aristotelian ethics that is usually seen only as a critical theory, not a normative one, and Nussbaum's primary attempt to classify neo-Aristotelians as either anti-Utilitarians or anti-Kantians. Despite this differentiation in her one article, there is no such distinction in her further works. The second problem in question is a reconstruction of the Aristotelian approach of virtues in the Nussbaumian interpretation and her attempt to combine it with two types of her capability approach – the basic and the global one. The article also focuses on whether the capability approach is normative or relativistic, and its critique.