The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Women and human development: the capabilities approach
Abstract
Women in much of the world lack support for fundamental functions of a human life.They are less well nourished than men, less healthy, more vulnerable to physical violence and sexual abuse.They are much less likely than men to be literate, and still less likely to have preprofessional or technical education.Should they attempt to enter the workplace, they face greater obstacles, including intimidation from family or spouse, sex discrimination in hiring, and sexual harassment in the workplace -all, frequently, without effective legal recourse.Similar obstacles often impede their effective participation in political life.In many nations women are not full equals under the law: they do not have the same property rights as men, the same rights to make a contract, the same rights of association, mobility, and religious liberty. 1 Burdened, often, with the ''double day'' of taxing employment and full responsibility for housework and child care, they lack opportunities for play and for the cultivation of their imaginative and cognitive faculties.All these factors take their toll on emotional well-being: women have fewer opportunities than men to live free from fear and to enjoy rewarding types of love -especially when, as often happens, they are married without choice in childhood and have no recourse from bad marriages.In all these ways, unequal social and political circumstances give women unequal human capabilities.1 For examples of these inequalities, see Chapter 3, and my ''Religion and Women's
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Citations
Cited by
Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business
Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556659 · Cited by 5,130
Sen, A. (2005) · Journal of Human Development · doi:10.1080/14649880500120491 · Cited by 1,966
The challenge of defining wellbeing
Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. (2012) · International Journal of Wellbeing · doi:10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4 · Cited by 2,166
A good life for all within planetary boundaries
O’Neill, D. W., Fanning, A. L., Lamb, W. F., & Steinberger, J. K. (2018) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-018-0021-4 · Cited by 1,452
Building Inclusive Markets in Rural Bangladesh: How Intermediaries Work Institutional Voids
Mair, J., Martí, I., & Ventresca, M. J. (2012) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0627 · Cited by 1,207
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 2000-09-01
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 01
- Pages
- 38-0369-38-0369
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W1761052593
- Cited by
- 3,704
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Women and human development: the capabilities approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.38-0369
- The paper
- Women and human development: the capabilities approach. (2000). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.38-0369
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.