Critiquing capabilities: The distractions of a beguiling concept
Open accessAbstract
The article provides a critique of the concept of `capabilities', initially advanced by Amartya Sen. The concept has directly influenced the workings of both the international United Nations Development Programme and the UK's domestic Equality and Human Rights Commission. It is argued that it is essentially a liberal-individualist concept. Despite its attractions — which the article acknowledges — the `capability approach' obscures or neglects three key realities: the constitutive nature of human interdependency; the problematic nature of the public realm; and the exploitative nature of capitalism. The article argues for an emancipatory politics of needs interpretation that would be better served by a discourse of rights than a discourse of capabilities.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 67 · Cited by 233
Research works printed but not linked: 47
- Alkire, S. (2002). Valuing Freedoms: Sen's capability approach and poverty reduction. New York: World Bank/Oxford University Press.
- Arendt, H. (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
- Bauman, Z. (1993). Postmodern Ethics. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Bordieu, P. (1997). The forms of capital. In A. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown & A. Wells (Eds.), Education, Culture, Economy, Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Bull, M. (2007). Vectors of the biopolitical. New Left Review, 45(May-June).
- Burchardt, T. (2006). Foundations for Measuring Equality: A discussion paper for the Equalities Review -CASEpaper 111. London: CASE/STICERD.
- Burchardt, T., & Vizard, P. (2007). Definition of Equality and Framework for Measurement: Final recommendations of the Equalities Review Steering Group on Measurement -CASEpaper 120. London: CASE/STICERD.
- Callinicos, A. (2003). An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto. Cambridge: Polity.
- Clarke, J. (2004). Dissolving the public realm? The logics and limits of neo-liberalism. Journal of Social Policy, 33(1), 27-48.
- Clement, G. (1998). Care, Autonomy and Justice: Feminism and the ethic of care. Boulder: Westview Press.
- Dean, H. (2002). Welfare Rights and Social Policy. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
- Dean, H. (2008). Social policy and human rights: Re-thinking the engagement. Social Policy and Society, 7(1), 1-12.
- Dean, H., & Rodgers, R. (2004). Popular discourses of dependency, responsibility and rights. In H. Dean (Ed.), The Ethics of Welfare. Bristol: The Policy Press.
- Deneulin, S., & Stewart, F. (2000). A capability approach for people living together, VHI conference -Justice and Poverty: Examining Sen's capability approach. St Edmunds College, Cambridge.
- Equalities Review. (2007). Fairness and Freedom: The final report of the Equalities Review. London: Cabinet Office.
- Finch, J., & Mason, J. (1993). Negotiating Family Responsibilities. London: Routledge.
- Fraser, N. (1989). Unruly Practices: Power, discourse and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
- Fraser, N. (1997). Justice Interruptus: Critical reflections on the 'postsocialist' condition. London: Routledge.
- Held, D. (1994). Inequalities of Power, Problems of Democracy. In D. Miliband (Ed.), Reinventing the Left. Cambridge: Polity.
- Hirschmann, N. (1997). Rethinking obligation for feminism. In N. Hirschmann & C. DiStefano (Eds.), Revisioning the Political: Feminist reconsideration of traditional concepts in Western political theory. Boulder: Westview Press.
- Honneth, A. (1995). The Struggle for Recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts. Cambridge: Polity.
- Jessop, B. (2002). The Future of the Capitalist State. Cambridge: Polity.
- Kittay, E., Jennings, B., & Wasunna, A. (2005). Dependency, difference and the global ethic of longterm care. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 13(4), 443-469.
- Lister, R. (2004). Poverty. Cambridge: Policy.
- Macintyre, A. (2007). After Virtue (3rd ed.). Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press.
- Marx, K. (1844). Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts. In (1975) (Ed.), Early Writings. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
- Marx, K. (1845). The Holy Family -extract. In T. Bottomore & M. Rubel (Eds.), Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy (1963 ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
- Marx, K. (1887). Capital (1970 edition ed. Vol. I, II, III). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
- Mooney, G. (Ed.). (2004). Work: Personal lives and social policy. Bristol: The Policy Press.
- Nussbaum, M. (2000a). The future of feminist liberalism. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 74(2), 47-49.
- Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of Justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Parker, R. (1981). Tending and Social Policy. In E. Goldberg & S. Hatch (Eds.), A New Look at the Personal Social Services. London: Policy Studies Institute.
- Ramose, M. (2003). Globalisation and ubuntu. In P. Coetzee & A. Roux (Eds.), The African Philosophy Reader. London: Routledge.
- Rawls, J. (1972). A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Roosevelt, F. D. (1944). State of the Union address to Congress 11 January. In S. Rosenman (Ed.), The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (1950 edition ed., Vol. XIII). New York: Harper.
- Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and Capabilities. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
- Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Sevenhuijsen, S. (1998). Citizenship and the Ethics of Care. London: Routledge.
- Sevenhuijsen, S. (2000). Caring in the thid way: The relation between obligation, responsibility and care in 'Third Way' discourse. Critical Social Policy, 20(1), 5- 37.
- Taylor, D. (1998). Social identity and social policy: Engagements with post-modern theory. Journal of Social Policy, 27(3), 329-350.
- Tronto, J. (1994). Moral Boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New York: Routledge.
- Turner, B. (1993). Outline of a theory of human rights. Sociology, 27(3), 489-512.
- United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2000). Human Development Report 2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2003). Human Development Report 2003 -Millennium Development Goals: A compact among nations to end human poverty. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Vizard, P., & Burchardt, T. (2007). Developing a Capability List: Final recommendations of the Equalities Review Steering Group on Measurement - CASEpaper 121. London: CASE/STICERD.
- Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of Justice. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Williamson, J. (1990). What Washington means by policy reform. In J. Williamson (Ed.), Latin American Adjustment: How much has happened? Washington: Institute for International Economics.
- Authors
- Dean, H.
- Affiliations
- London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Dean, Hartley
- ORCID
- Dean, Hartley
- Venue
- Critical Social Policy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-05
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 261-278
- ISSN
- 0261-0183 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-703X
- OpenAlex
- W2102699034
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 33.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Critical Social Policy (publishedVersion)
- London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
- London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Human Rights and Development
- Keywords
- capability approach, Amartya Sen, capabilities, human rights, public realm, capitalism, liberal individualism, UNDP, Equality and Human Rights Commission, emancipatory politics, rights discourse
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
