The Capabilities Perspective: A Framework for Social Justice

2002 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia McGrath Morris
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Martha Nussbaum ◽  
Amartya Sen ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Political Philosopher

The concept of social justice is deeply rooted in social work. The theoretical framework most often embraced by the profession is John Rawls' A Theory of Justice. However, like most frameworks it has limitations. This paper examines Rawls' social justice framework as interpreted by social work and offers an alternative, called the “capabilities” perspective, that emerged nearly a decade after Rawls' 1971 seminal work. Developed by welfare economist Amartya Sen and further articulated by political philosopher Martha Nussbaum, this perspective builds on Rawls' distributive justice approach and adds the dimensions of human dignity, self-determination, and well-being to its justice framework.

scholarly journals Justice and the politics of capabilities

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-178
Author(s):  
Hrvoje Cvijanović
Keyword(s):  
Human Dignity ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Capabilities Approach ◽  
Martha Nussbaum ◽  
Amartya Sen ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Primary Goods ◽  
The Given ◽  
Theoretical Project

Linking the idea of justice with human dignity through the 'politics of capabilities' is a recent theoretical project advanced by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum and inspired by the shortcomings of Rawls's understanding of justice. Rawls's view on the redistribution of resources or primary goods has nothing to say about someone's capabilities to use these goods, so the idea of capabilities becomes central since it is focused on the way of life a person has a reason to value. The article discusses Sen and Nussbaum's development of the capabilities approach and their criticism of Rawls's fundamental premises about justice. Although the capabilities approach attempts to rectify injustices that Rawls failed to address properly, there are limitations of that approach as well. At the end, it is shown that capabilities are valued in relation to their contribution to the system of production – having more capabilities enhances someone's socio-economic position within the given structure – but this does not question the existing power relations and the very structure that perpetuate inequalities. Hence, the author agrees with the line of criticism that invokes the issue of power relations provided by Vicente Navarro, yet extending this criticism to Rawls's theory of justice for not fundamentally questioning the power relations inherent in the institutions reproducing social injustices.

scholarly journals Comprender la pobreza: debate entre John Rawls y Amartya Sen

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eguzki Urteaga
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Original Position ◽  
Amartya Sen ◽  
Difference Principle ◽  
Veil Of Ignorance ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Basic Goods ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Veil

RESUMENReconstrucción teórica de nuestras intuiciones a propósito de la justicia social, la Teoría de la justicia de John Rawls debía tomar en consideración a los más desfavorecidos a través del principio de diferencia que reparte los bienes de manera equitativa. Para Rawls, la objetividad moral está garantizada por la experiencia del posicionamiento original, caracterizada por el velo de ignorancia. Amartya Sen cuestiona ese planteamiento criticando el índice de los bienes básicos. Este artículo explicita lo que está en juego en este debate y desarrolla las aportaciones de la teoría de las capacidades a la reflexión contemporánea sobre las desigualdades socioeconómicas.PALABRAS CLAVERawls – Sen – teoría – pobreza – capacidadABSTRACTIn his theoretical reconstruction of our intuitions about social justice, John Rawls’s Theory of justice intended to take into consideration the worst-off due to the difference principle that distributes the goods in an equal way. For Rawls, the moral objectivity is guaranteed by the experience of the original position, characterized by the veil of ignorance that conceals particular interests. But, Amartya Sen has criticized this theory and specially the index of basic goods. This article states explicitly what is at stake in this debate and develops the contributions of the theory of capabilities to the contemporary reflection on the economic and social inequalities.KEYWORDSRawls - Sen - theory - poverty - capability

Indigenous social work across borders: Expanding social work in the South Pacific

2016 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracie Mafile’o ◽  
Halaevalu F Ofahengaue Vakalahi
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Social Work Education ◽  
South Pacific ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Cultural Preservation ◽  
Current Status ◽  
The South ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
Work Education

Pacific indigenous social work has developed across borders reflecting the diaspora of Pacific peoples outside their homelands. It is proposed that the ‘next wave’ of Pacific social work be centred in Pacific homelands to invigorate new approaches that better address well-being for transnational Pacific peoples. The current status of Pacific social work education, professionalization and theory is discussed. It is argued that social justice, locally-led development and cultural preservation will be better realized with an expansion of Pacific social work across borders. The article reflects on decolonization, universalism–relativism, nature of social work, resourcing and collaborations for Pacific social work.

La Idea de “Razón Publica” (y su Revisión) en el Último Rawls

2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (22) ◽  
pp. 5-31
Author(s):  
Fernando Aranda Fraga ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Public Good ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Public Reason ◽  
Political Liberalism ◽  
The Political ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Key Topics ◽  
Political Philosopher

In 1993 John Rawls published his main and longest work since 1971, where he had published his reknowned A Theory of Justice, book that made him famous as the greatest political philosopher of the century. We are referring to Political Liberalism, a summary of his writings of the 80’s and the first half of the 90’s, where he attempts to answer the critics of his intellectual partners, communitarian philosophers. One of the key topics in this book is the issue of “public reason”, whose object is nothing else than public good, and on which the principles and proceedings of justice are to be applied. The book was so important for the political philosophy of the time that in 1997 Rawls had to go through the 1993 edition, becoming this new one the last relevant writing published before the death of the Harvard philosopher in November 2002.

Well-Being, Adaptation and Human Limitations*

2006 ◽  
Vol 59 ◽  
pp. 83-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mozaffar Qizilbash
Keyword(s):  
Capability Approach ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Martha Nussbaum ◽  
Amartya Sen ◽  
Reliable Basis ◽  
The Capability Approach

Philosophical accounts of human well-being face a number of significant challenges. In this paper, I shall be primarily concerned with one of these. It relates to the possibility, noted by Martha Nussbaum and Amartya Sen amongst others, that people’s desires and attitudes are malleable and can ‘adapt’ in various ways to the straitened circumstances in which they live. If attitudes or desires adapt in this way it can be argued that the relevant desires or attitudes fail to provide a reliable basis for evaluating well-being. This is, what I shall call the ‘adaptation problem’. Nussbaum and Sen have—in different ways used this argument to motivate their versions of the ‘capability approach’. However, questions remain about the implications of adaptation for philosophical accounts of well-being.

Conclusion

2020 ◽  
pp. 171-174
Author(s):  
Timothy Fowler
Keyword(s):  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Fair Share ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Economic Fairness ◽  
Children's Interests ◽  
Good Environment

The central arguments of this book have been that children are owed a good environment in which to grow up and that adults are owed the stable and supported right to care for children if they so desire. In Part I, I explored how to conceptualize children’s justice and how to measure whether children’s interests are being met by their society. I showed why children’s interests cannot be understood in terms of holding a set of resources, even if resources are understood in a very broad sense. When the subject of justice is understood to be adults, then it makes sense that the role of principles of justice simply be giving each person their fair share. This was the perspective taken by the two most influential liberal thinkers of the last century, John Rawls and Ronald Dworkin. I suggested their approach cannot cope with the needs of children, since children might have a fair share of economic resources yet grow up socialized into beliefs, values and practices that are harmful to their current and future flourishing. A theory of justice must, therefore, take holistic account of the various ways in which upbringing might affect a person’s life, thus looking at its effects on children’s well-being. To meet this challenge, I offered an objective list account of children’s well-being which suggested that this is principally driven by the quality of their relationships with others. This theoretical shift implies a reconceptualization of what justice is about. Instead of justice being understood primarily as economic fairness, it must be seen as fundamentally about creating a society with norms and practice which foster flourishing interpersonal relationships, with a particular concern for the least advantaged children whose interests must be given priority....

Identifying the invisible: The experiences of prostitution among persons with intellectual disabilities: Implications for social work

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jari Kuosmanen ◽  
Mikaela Starke
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Special Schools ◽  
People With Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Group Interviews

• Summary: This article explores a relatively uncharted research area. The focus of the analysis is on how professionals working in care provision units, specialized prostitution units, the police, social services and special schools detect and deal with prostitution among people with intellectual disabilities. The data were obtained primarily through focus group interviews. The study shows that organizational specialization in different authorities and services makes it difficult to identify and work with this group. Clients with complex problems tend to find themselves in between the jurisdictional fields of different authorities, meaning that many do not receive the support that they need. • Findings: In recent decades social work has undergone increasing balkanization and specialization. Each particular organization is regulated by specific legislation, regulations, forms of knowledge and normative assumptions. Professionals working with people with intellectual disabilities have difficulties in detecting prostitution among their clients, whilst those who work with prostitution lack the knowledge and methods to work with intellectual disabilities. At the same time, social work with these individuals is conducted within a field of tension between the client′s right of self-determination and professionals’ responsibilities for their well-being. • Applications: The study demonstrates that, with this type of complex problem, it is important to establish different types of collaboration between different organizations. However, due to the risk of increased control being detrimental to clients, collaboration needs to be founded on the client’s needs and right to self-determination.

Justice and Culture: Rawls, Sen, Acile Fabreo' Neill

2003 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
CéAcile Fabre ◽  
David Miller
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Values ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Martha Nussbaum ◽  
Amartya Sen ◽  
Human Capabilities ◽  
Liberal Societies ◽  
The Face ◽  
Liberal Rights ◽  
Over Time

Is it possible, in a multicultural world, to hold all societies to a common standard of decency that is both high enough to protect basic human interests, and yet not biased in the direction of particular cultural values? We examine the recent work of four liberals – John Rawls, Amartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum and Onora O' Neill – to see whether any of them has given a successful answer to this question. For Rawls, the decency standard is set by reference to an idea of basic human rights that we argue offers too little protection to members of non-liberal societies. Sen and Nussbaum both employ the idea of human capabilities, but in interestingly different ways: for Sen the problems are how to weight different capabilities, and how to decide which are basic, whereas for Nussbaum the difficulty is that her favoured list of capabilities depends on an appeal to autonomy that is unlikely to be acceptable to non-liberal cultures. O' Neill rejects a rights-based approach in favour of a neo-Kantian position that asks which principles of action people everywhere could consent to, but this also may be too weak in the face of cultural diversity. We conclude that liberals need to argue both for a minimum decency standard and for the full set of liberal rights as the best guarantors of that standard over time.

Justice and the Difference Principle

1974 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Copp
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Reflective Equilibrium ◽  
Difference Principle ◽  
The Public ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Moral Basis ◽  
The People ◽  
Moral Learning ◽  
The Difference

In his book, A Theory of Justice, John Rawls suggests that a theory of social justice is satisfactory only if it has both of two characteristics (pp. 182, 6). First, it must be capable of serving as the “public moral basis of society” (p. 182). That is, it must be reasonable to suppose that it would be strictly complied with while serving as the public conception of justice in a society which is in favourable circumstances—a society in which the people would strictly comply with any public conception of justice if the strains of commitment to it were not too great, given the general facts of psychology and moral learning (p. 145, cf. pp. 8, 175-83, 245-6). Second, a theory of justice must characterize “ … our considered judgements in reflective equilibrium” (p. 182).

scholarly journals Teorias de justiça social aplicadas a políticas públicas no Brasil para redução de desigualdades / Theories of social justice applied to public policies in Brazil to reduce inequalities

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antônio Walber Matias Muniz ◽  
Fernanda Eduardo Olea do Rio Muniz
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Public Policies ◽  
Amartya Sen ◽  
Social Programs ◽  
Grant Program ◽  
The Family ◽  
Bolsa Familia ◽  
The Face ◽  
Political Decisions

Resumo: Este trabalho visa discutir sobre a aplicabilidade das concepções de justiça às políticas sociais no Brasil. Busca-se constatar qual concepção de justiça melhor se identifica com programas sociais do Governo Federal brasileiro, decorrentes da implantação de políticas públicas de combate à pobreza e de redução de desigualdades. Faz-se isso considerando a instituição do programa "Bolsa Família" frente as concepções de justiça formuladas por filósofos e economistas tais como: Platão, Aristóteles, Hobbes, Rousseau, Kant, Del Vecchio, Kelsen, John Rawls, Hayek e Amartya Sem, os quais compõem a base metodológica desta pesquisa bibliográfica. Conclui-se que, a concepção de justiça preconizada pelo economista Amartya Sen, ao defender decisões políticas capazes de ampliar a justiça social para minimizar injustiças intoleráveis, promover o desenvolvimento, movimentar a economia e respeitar os direitos humanos, melhor se identifica com o programa governamental "Bolsa Família". Abstract: This paper aims to discuss the applicability of conceptions of justice to social policies in Brazil. It seeks to verify which conception of justice is best identified with social programs of the Brazilian Federal Government, resulting from the implementation of public policies to combat poverty and reduce inequalities. This is done by considering the institution of the Family Grant program in the face of the conceptions of justice formulated by philosophers and economists such as Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Rousseau, Kant, Del Vecchio, Kelsen, John Rawls, Hayek and Amartya Sem. which make up the methodological basis of this bibliographic research. It is concluded that the conception of justice advocated by the economist Amartya Sen, when defending political decisions capable of extending social justice to minimize intolerable injustices, promote development, move the economy and respect human rights, is better identified with the governmental program "Bolsa Família".

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document