Suchergebnisse

This paper tries to measure the level of empowerment of elected women representatives (EWRs) at the Gram Panchayat level in the light of Prof. Amartya Sen's 'Capability Approach.' In this paper, the level of empowerment of EWRs or "agency" has been measured through Women Empowerment Index (WEI) on the basis of five types of 'instrumental freedoms' like, Social Opportunities, Economic Facilities, Political Freedoms, Transparency Guarantees and Protective Security. On the other hand, the 'capability set' or the "alternative combinations of functioning" of EWRs or "agency" has been assessed through Gram Panchayat Performance Index (GPPI). By comparing WEI and GPPI, the paper has assessed the level of empowerment of EWRs during the last two boards (2003-08) and (2008-2013) in West Bengal.

This essay applies Amartya Sen's Capability Approach to the way democracy is practiced in the Philippines by Filipinos. The author has reached the conclusion that negative freedom does not secure for people their well-being. Thus, even after the removal of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, the Philippines still remains poor. In this essay, the author argues that Filipinos should empower themselves morally in terms of their positive freedoms or capability, and the Church can be at the frontlines of this initiative, in order to achieve national development.

Amartya Sen's capability approach redefined development in terms of people and their quality of life. Since development suggests the idea of positive change, it highlights what is worth changing, the desirable outcome and the desirable way to achieve it. This influential framework has succeeded in engaging different disciplines in constructive debate. There is a growing, and dispersed, literature adding and critiquing it. Hence, providing a current conceptual account of the approach, on its own terms, to assess its contribution to the project it undertakes, address its alleged shortcomings, and point to avenues to further the debate seems warranted. This is particularly timely given its 30 years of influence over public policy, as evidenced by the United Nations' Human Development Reports

Resumen: The capabilities approaches (CA) have been originated in the work of the economist Amartya Sen on inequality. Sen, born in India in 1933, is currently Emeritus Professor of Harvard University. He is still active in teaching and researching. He was always concerned with the problem of social justice, poverty and equality. This has led him to hold a broad notion and an ethical view of economics. Driven by these concerns, Sen tackled the topics of inequality and quality of life, and during the 80s he formulated the capability approach. Sen's capability approach is a broad normative framework for the evaluation and assessment of individual well-being, development of countries, present socio-economic situation and social arrangements in order to implement right policies. For Sen, human agency is a crucial element of human well-being in a broad sense that goes beyond utility and that is related to the quality of life. Human agency entails freedom: Freedoms are capabilities of performing some actions, called by him "functionings". These capabilities and functionings compose a good life. Capabilities, for Sen, are a better way of assessing well-being than utility or income (for a good survey, see e.g., Sen 1993 and Ingrid Robeyns 2005). Nobody would deny that this is good news. A concern among scholars, however, has arisen about the operationality of Sen's CA. Traits as the incommensurability of capabilities and their ambiguous definition (see Sen 1999: 76- 7) are sufficient reasons for this concern. As Robert Sugden affirms, "it is natural to ask how far Sen's framework is operational" (1993: 1953). Some arguments for this lack of operationality might be summarized in terms of the inexact or "vague" character of practical reason, the capacity that lies behind the whole CA (on the central role of practical reason within the CA see Nussbaum 1987: 47 and 1995a). For Sen, indeed, the capabilities's ambiguity, both in their definition and in their election, is a positive feature because it reflects and respects the freedom and the differences of the persons (1993: 33-34): for him, asserting ambiguity and fuzziness is not a weakness but a strength.

Over the last 30 years the Indian philosopher-economist Amartya Sen has developed an original normative approach to the evaluation of individual and social well-being. The foundational concern of this 'capability approach' is the real freedom of individuals to achieve the kind of lives they have reason to value. This freedom is analysed in terms of an individual's 'capability' to achieve combinations of such intrinsically valuable 'beings and doings' ('functionings') as being sufficiently nourished and freely expressing one's political views. In this account, 'development' is conceived as the expansion of individuals' capability, and thus as a concept tha

Kuklys examines how Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen?s approach to welfare measurement can be put in practice for poverty and inequality measurement in affluent societies such as the UK. Sen argues that an individual?s welfare should not be measured in terms of her income, but in terms what she can actually do or be, her capabilities. In Chapters 1 and 2, Kuklys describes the capability approach from a standard welfare economic point of view and provides a comprehensive literature review of the empirical applications in this area of research. In the remaining chapters, novel econometr