Capability ApproachEdit

Capability approach is a normative framework for evaluating welfare, justice, and public policy that centers on what people are able to do and to be—their real opportunities—rather than on resource totals, utility, or happiness alone. Developed in moral philosophy and economics, it treats freedom as the essence of wellbeing: a person is well off to the extent that they have genuine choices and capabilities to pursue lives they value. The approach is tied to the work of Amartya Sen, whose critique of traditional welfare measures stressed capabilities and agency, and to Martha Nussbaum, who articulated a concrete list of central capabilities. Amartya Sen Martha Nussbaum Capability approach

In practice, the capability approach asks not only how much people possess but what they can actually do with what they possess. It has become influential in international development and public policy as a yardstick for measuring progress beyond gross domestic product or income per person. The idea is to expand people’s real freedoms by improving political legitimacy, health, education, security, and the social arrangements that shape opportunities. The framework also invites a critical look at how social norms, institutions, and markets either expand or constrain what individuals can achieve. Human Development Index Public policy Development economics

From a typical policy perspective in many market-oriented systems, the capability approach aligns with efforts to empower individuals through sound macroeconomic management, the rule of law, and high-quality public goods, while reserving room for private initiative and voluntary exchange. It tends to favor policies that remove barriers to opportunity—rather than simply distributing income—and it recognizes that resources matter only insofar as they can be converted into real opportunities. This practical emphasis resonates with traditional conservative concerns for merit, responsibility, and the efficient use of public resources, while challenging policy makers to think beyond GDP to what people can actually do in life. Rule of law Property rights Education Healthcare

History and foundations The capability approach emerged as a critique of welfare economics and utilitarianism that privileged aggregates, averages, or resource endowments over the actual possibilities people have in their daily lives. Amartya Sen argued that development should be judged by the expansion of people’s capabilities and by the removal of deprivations that prevent meaningful agency. He emphasized freedom as both the means and the ends of development, insisting that public policy should focus on removing obstacles that prevent people from converting resources into valuable functionings. Amartya Sen

Martha Nussbaum later helped to articulate the approach in more concrete normative terms, proposing a list of central capabilities that she argued are indispensable to a minimally decent human life. Her formulation stresses that there are universal requirements—such as life, bodily integrity, and education—that any society should help secure, while still allowing for cultural variation in how those capabilities are promoted. This universalist stance has generated debate about scope and implementation, particularly in diverse political and cultural contexts. Martha Nussbaum

Core concepts - Functionings vs capabilities: Functionings are realized states of being and doing (for example, being well-nourished, being literate). Capabilities are the real opportunities to achieve those functionings (the freedom to be well-nourished or literate, given personal and social circumstances). The distinction helps separate what people have from what they can actually choose to become. Functionings vs Capabilitys - Capabilities and freedom: The focus is on substantive freedoms—the real alternatives available to individuals—rather than on abstract resources. This foregrounds agency, choice, and the ability to pursue a life one values. Freedom Agency - Conversion factors: People’s ability to convert a given resource into a valuable functioning depends on personal attributes (health, intelligence), social arrangements (gender norms, social capital), and environmental conditions (infrastructure, climate). Recognizing conversion factors helps explain why similar resources can yield very different outcomes across people. Conversion factors (conceptual) - The capability set: An individual’s set of achievable functionings depends on a mix of resources, institutions, and choices. Expanding the capability set—through education, health services, secure property rights, and inclusive institutions—broadly raises welfare in a way that markets or welfare alone may not. Public policy Education Healthcare

Policy implications and debates - What policy should aim to expand? Proponents argue that policy should maximize substantive freedoms by improving health, education, political participation, and safe living conditions. In practice this translates into cross-cutting reforms: universal access to essential services, rule of law, anti-corruption measures, and inclusive governance. The approach also interacts with measures like the Human Development Index to track progress over time. Public policy Human Development Index - Right-leaning interpretations: A center-right perspective tends to stress that real freedom is best advanced through growth, competitive markets, rule of law, and prudent public spending. The capability approach is attractive insofar as it emphasizes capability expansion—which markets and innovation can deliver—without prescribing rigid, centralized control. It can justify targeted, accountable public programs that unlock opportunity while avoiding broad, costly welfare schemes that may distort incentives. In this reading, government’s job is to create the conditions for opportunity (security of property and contracts, predictable regulation, high-quality public goods) rather than to guarantee particular life choices. Growth economics Meritocracy Rule of law - Critiques and limitations: Critics worry that the approach can be too expansive, normative in a way that makes policy hard to operationalize, or costly if it attempts to monitor and satisfy a long list of capabilities. Some critics also worry that universalist lists may clash with cultural particularism or create pressure to pursue policies that overextend state capacity. Proponents reply that the framework is flexible, emphasizing outcomes and real opportunities rather than a one-size-fits-all program, and that it can be implemented with transparent, achievement-based goals and robust evaluation. Utilitarianism Global justice - Controversies and debates: A central debate concerns whether there should be a universal list of capabilities (as Nussbaum argues) or whether capabilities should emerge from plural, context-sensitive judgments (as Sen suggests). This disagreement touches on questions of legitimacy, legitimacy, and transferability of policy solutions across countries with different institutions. The capability approach also intersects with discussions about social justice, poverty alleviation, and the proper balance between market and state. Martha Nussbaum Amartya Sen - Woke criticisms and responses: Critics sometimes argue that the capability approach is a vehicle for identity-based social claims or that it yields a roadmap for redistribution that conflicts with incentives or with particular political economies. From a pragmatic, rights-centered view, supporters contend that expanding genuine choices and fair access to essential services does not require abandoning market incentives; rather, it aligns policy with the ultimate objective of equal liberty of choice. They stress that the framework centers on individual agency and the removal of obstacles to real options, rather than prescribing quotas or group-based outcomes. The debate often centers on methodology and scope, not on the legitimacy of improving people’s real freedoms. Public policy Freedom

Applications and empirical work In practice, the capability approach has guided international development policy, index construction, and program evaluation. The HDI is a prominent example that captures life expectancy, education, and living standards as proxies for capabilities. Researchers and policymakers use the framework to assess how reforms in health, education, and governance translate into real opportunities for people, and to judge whether growth translates into meaningful improvements in daily life. This approach also informs debates about measurement, data collection, and the design of targeted interventions. Human Development Index Development economics

Relationship to other theories - Compared with utilitarianism: The capability approach emphasizes the quality and variety of life opportunities rather than the maximization of a single aggregated utility metric. Utilitarianism - Compared with Rawlsian justice: It shares a concern for fair opportunities but allows for more pluralistic judgments about which capabilities matter and how to weigh them in practice. John Rawls - Relation to libertarian or market-based views: While compatible with strong property rights and rule of law, the framework pushes policymakers to consider whether markets alone deliver real freedoms and whether public institutions should correct failures that markets leave behind. Libertarianism

See also - Amartya Sen - Martha Nussbaum - Capability approach - Human Development Index - Education - Healthcare - Public policy - Freedom - Agency - Development economics