Cited by 1,966Political Philosophy and EthicsHuman Rights and DevelopmentLegal Rights and Human Rights

Human rights and capabilities

Sen, Amartya·2005·Journal of Human Development

Abstract

The two concepts — human rights and capabilities — go well with each other, so long as we do not try to subsume either concept entirely within the territory of the other. There are many human rights that can be seen as rights to particular capabilities. However, human rights to important process freedoms cannot be adequately analysed within the capability framework. Furthermore, both human rights and capabilities have to depend on the process of public reasoning. The methodology of public scrutiny draws on Rawlsian understanding of ‘objectivity’ in ethics, but the impartiality that is needed cannot be confined within the borders of a nation. Public reasoning without territorial confinement is important for both.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14649880500120491

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Perspectives such as Occupational Justice and the Capabilities Framework ground an understanding of what people can do and be in the structural and contextual conditions that support or restrict possibilities for doing, and thereby could locate time use scholarship and practice in the realm of social justice.

    “For example, perspectives such as Occupational Justice (90) and the Capabilities Framework (91, 92) ground an understanding of what people can do and be in the structural and contextual conditions that support or restrict possibilities for doing, and thereby could locate time use scholarship and practice in the realm of social justice.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sen, A.
Corresponding author
Sen, Amartya
Venue
Journal of Human Development
Published
2005-07
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
151-166
ISSN
  • 1464-9888 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-9516
OpenAlex
W2096196718
Cited by
1,966
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 83 · 2025: 113 · 2024: 147 · 2023: 131 · 2022: 158 · 2021: 157 · 2020: 187 · 2019: 142 · 2018: 132 · 2017: 110 · 2016: 107 · 2015: 85 · 2014: 95 · 2013: 90 · 2012: 53
FWCI
103.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Human Development (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Università degli Studi di Pavia
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Human Rights and Development
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal Rights and Human Rights
Keywords
human rights, capability approach, John Rawls, public reasoning, impartial spectator

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review