Book contents
- Social Choice, Agency, Inclusiveness and Capabilities
- Social Choice, Agency, Inclusiveness and Capabilities
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction: social choice, agency, inclusiveness and capabilities
- Part I Social Choice and Capabilities
- Part II Inclusiveness, Social and Individual Agency
- Part III Social Choice and Capabilities in Action
- 14 Measuring the independence of ‘dependent’ persons based on the capability approach
- 15 Indigenous challenges to the capability approach
- 16 Situating the family within the capabilities framework: a collective conversion factor
- 17 An ethical perspective on the United Kingdom’s Improving Lives: The Future of Work, Health and Disability
- 18 Public services as conversion factors
- Index
- References
15 - Indigenous challenges to the capability approach
A relational ontology of community and sustainability
from Part III - Social Choice and Capabilities in Action
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2024
Book contents
- Social Choice, Agency, Inclusiveness and Capabilities
- Social Choice, Agency, Inclusiveness and Capabilities
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction: social choice, agency, inclusiveness and capabilities
- Part I Social Choice and Capabilities
- Part II Inclusiveness, Social and Individual Agency
- Part III Social Choice and Capabilities in Action
- 14 Measuring the independence of ‘dependent’ persons based on the capability approach
- 15 Indigenous challenges to the capability approach
- 16 Situating the family within the capabilities framework: a collective conversion factor
- 17 An ethical perspective on the United Kingdom’s Improving Lives: The Future of Work, Health and Disability
- 18 Public services as conversion factors
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter offers a rereading of Amartya Sen’s capability approach (CA) from the perspective of the Andean region that highlights their differences. The aim of this chapter is to contribute to the engagement of the CA with indigenous philosophies, and to use the latter’s insights to push the former’s boundaries. In particular, the authors discuss the differences between the relational ontology that underpins the BV framework with the dualistic ontology upon which Sen’s CA is built. While Sen’s ethical considerations in development remain of paramount importance for contemporary thinking and practice, the focus on individual freedom within the CA is embedded within a dualistic ontology that separates humans from nature and individuals from their societies. A consideration of the challenges associated with the BV framework allows the authors to address some of the most contentious areas within the CA literature: those relating to collective capabilities and sustainability issues.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Social Choice, Agency, Inclusiveness and Capabilities , pp. 323 - 355Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024
References
Acosta, A. (2010) El buen vivir en el camino del post-desarrollo: una lectura desde la constitución de Montecristi, Policy Paper 9. Quito: Fundación Friedrich Ebert.Google Scholar
Acosta, A. (2012) Buen Vivir – Sumak Kawsay: Una oportunidad para imaginar otros mundos. Quito: Abya Yala.Google Scholar
Acosta, A. (2014) Poscrecimiento y posextractivismo: dos caras de una misma transformación cultural. In Pos-crecimiento y Buen Vivir: Propuestas globales para la construcción de sociedades equitativas y sustentables, Endara, G. (ed.): 93–122. Quito: FES-ILDIS.Google Scholar
Acosta, A., and Martínez, E. (eds.) (2011) La naturaleza con derechos: De la filosofía a la política. Quito: Abya Yala.Google Scholar
Agarwal, B., Humphries, J., and Robeyns, I. (2003) Exploring the challenges of Amartya Sen’s work and ideas: an introduction. Feminist Economics, 9 (2/3): 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albro, R. (2006) The culture of democracy and Bolivia’s Indigenous movements. Critique of Anthropology, 26 (4): 387–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alkire, S. (2005) Why the capability approach? Journal of Human Development, 6 (1): 115–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altmann, P. (2013) El Sumak Kawsay en el discurso del movimiento indígena ecuatoriano. Indiana, 30: 283–99.Google Scholar
Anand, S., and Sen, A. K. (1994) Sustainable human development: concepts and priorities, Occasional Paper 1. New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
Anand, S., (1995) Gender inequality in human development: theories and measurement, Occasional Paper 19. New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
Anand, S., (1998) Consumption and human development: concepts and issues, occasional paper. New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
Basu, K., and Kanbur, R. (eds.) (2009) Arguments for a Better World: Essays in Honor of Amartya Sen, vol. 1, Ethics, Welfare, and Measurement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beling, A. E., Vanhulst, J., Demaria, F., Rabi, V., Carballo, A. E., and Pelenc, J. (2018) Discursive synergies for a ‘great transformation’ towards sustainability: pragmatic contributions to a necessary dialogue between human development, degrowth, and buen vivir. Ecological Economics, 144: 304–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bockstael, E., and Watene, K. (2016) Indigenous peoples and the capability approach: taking stock. Oxford Development Studies, 44 (3): 265–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choque, M. E. (2000) La reconstitución del ayllu y los derechos de los pueblos indígenas. Quito: FLACSO.Google Scholar
Choque, M. E., and Mamani, C. (2001) Reconstitución del ayllu y derechos de los pueblos indígenas: el movimiento indio en los Andes de Bolivia. Journal of Latin American Anthropology, 6 (1): 202–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comim, F., Fennell, S., and Anand, P. B. (eds.) (2018) New Frontiers of the Capability Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comim, F., Qizilbash, M., and Alkire, S. (eds.) (2008) The Capability Approach: Concepts, Measures and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costoya, M. M. (2012) Latin American post-neoliberal development thinking: the Bolivian ‘turn’ toward suma qamaña. European Journal of Development Research, 25 (2): 213–29.Google Scholar
Crabtree, J., and Chaplin, A. (2013) Bolivia: Processes of Change. London: Zed Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crocker, D. (1991) Toward development ethics. World Development, 19 (5): 457–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De la Cadena, M. (2010) Indigenous cosmopolitics in the Andes: conceptual reflections beyond ‘politics’. Cultural Anthropology, 25 (2): 334–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escobar, A. (2010a) Una minga para el postdesarrollo: Lugar, medio ambiente y movimientos sociales en las transformaciones globales. Lima: Programa Democracia y Transformación Global.Google Scholar
Escobar, A. (2010b) Latin America at a crossroads: alternative modernizations, post-liberalism, or post-development? Cultural Studies, 24 (1): 1–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escobar, A. (2011) Sustainability: design for the pluriverse. Development, 54 (2): 137–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, P. (2002) Collective capabilities, culture, and Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37 (2): 54–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabricant, N. (2010) Between the romance of collectivism and the reality of individualism: ayllu rhetoric in Bolivia’s landless peasant movement. Latin American Perspectives, 37 (4): 88–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández Osco, M. (2005) Ayllu: decolonial critical thinking and an (other) autonomy. In Globalization and Autonomy Online Compendium, 1–2. www.globalautonomy.ca/global1/article.jsp?index=RS_FernandezOsco_Ayllu.xml.Google Scholar
Fukuda-Parr, S. (2003a) Rescuing human development concept from the Human Development Index. In Readings in Human Development: Concepts, Measures and Policies for a Development Paradigm, Fukuda-Parr, S., and Shiva Kumar, A. K. (eds.): 117–24. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fukuda-Parr, S. (2003b) The human development paradigm: operationalizing Sen’s ideas on capabilities. Feminist Economics, 9 (2/3): 301–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giraud, G., Renouard, C., L’Huillier, H., and De La Martinière, R. (2013) Relational capability: a multidimensional approach, working paper 1306. Paris: ESSEC.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Wood, R., and Mamani-Vargas, R. (2017) The coercive side of collective capabilities: evidence from the Bolivian Altiplano. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 18 (1): 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godoy, R. A. (1986) The fiscal role of the Andean ayllu. Man: Journal of the Royal Anthropological Society, 21 (4): 723–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goulet, D. (1997) Development ethics: a new discipline. International Journal of Social Economics, 24 (11): 1160–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosfoguel, R. (2016) Del ‘extractivismo económico’ al ‘extractivismo epistémico’ y al ‘extractivismo ontológico’: una forma destructiva de conocer, ser y estar en el mundo. Tabula Rasa, 24: 123–43.Google Scholar
Gudynas, E. (2009a) La dimensión ecológica del buen vivir: entre el fantasma de la modernidad y el desafío biocéntrico. Revista Obets. 4: 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gudynas, E. (2009b) El mandato ecológico: Derechos de la naturaleza y políticas ambientales en la nueva constitución. Quito: Abya Yala.Google Scholar
Gudynas, E. (2012) Transiciones Para Salir del Viejo Desarrollo. Lima: Centro Peruano de Estudios Sociales.Google Scholar
Gudynas, E. (2014a) Buen vivir: sobre secuestros, domesticaciones rescates y alternativas. In Bifurcación del Buen Vivir y el Sumak Kawsay, Oviedo, A. F. (ed.): 23–45. Quito: Ediciones Yachay.Google Scholar
Gudynas, E. (2014b) El postdesarrollo como crítica y el buen vivir como alternativa. In Buena vida, buen vivir: Imaginarios alternativos para el bien común de la humanidad, Delgado Ramos, G. C. (ed.): 61–95. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Gudynas, E. (2014c) Conflictos y extractivismos: conceptos, contenidos y dinamicas. DECURSOS: Revista en ciencias sociales, 27: 79–115.Google Scholar
Gudynas, E., and Acosta, A. (2011a) El buen vivir mas allá del desarrollo. Qué hacer, 181: 70–81.Google Scholar
Gudynas, E., (2011b) La renovación de la crítica al desarrollo y el buen vivir como alternativa. Utopía y praxis Latinoamericana, 53: 71–83.Google Scholar
Harris, O. (2000) To Make the Earth Bear Fruit: Essays on Fertility, Work and Gender in Highland Bolivia. London: Institute of Latin American Studies.Google Scholar
Hidalgo-Capitán, A. L. (2012) El buen vivir: La (re)creación del pensamiento del PYDLOS. Huelva y Cuenca: PYDLOS Ediciones.Google Scholar
Hidalgo-Capitán, A. L., and Cubillo-Guevara, A. P. (2014) Seis debates abiertos sobre el sumak kawsay. Iconos. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 48: 25–40.Google Scholar
Huanacuni Mamani, F. (2010a) Paradigma occidental y paradigma indígena originario. America latina en movimiento, 452: 17–23.Google Scholar
Huanacuni Mamani, F. (2010b) Buen vivir/vivir bien: Filosofía, políticas, estrategias y experiencias regionales andinas. Lima: Coordinadora Andina de Organizaciones Indígenas.Google Scholar
Kaul, I. (2014) Fostering sustainable human development: managing the macro-risks of vulnerability, occasional paper. New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
Ki-moon, B. (2010) Remarks at launch of 20th Human Development Report. United Nations, 4 November. www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2010-11-04/remarks-launch-20th-human-development-report.Google Scholar
Klein, E. (2015) A critical review of the capability approach in Australian Indigenous policy, Working Paper 102/2015. Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Klein, E. (2016) The curious case of using the capability approach in Australian Indigenous policy. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 17 (2): 245–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kowii, A. (2014) Sumak kawsay. In Antología del pensamiento indigenista ecuatoriano sobre sumak kawsay, Hidalgo-Capitán, A. L., García, A. G., and Guazha, N. D. (eds.): 161–8. Huelva y Cuenca: Universidad de Huelva.Google Scholar
Llasag Fernandez, R. (2009) El sumak kawsay y sus restricciones constitucionales. Foro: revista de derecho, 12: 113–25.Google Scholar
Longshore Smith, M., and Seward, C. (2009) The relational ontology of Amartya Sen’s capability approach: incorporating social and individual causes. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10 (2): 213–35.Google Scholar
Macas, L. (2014) El sumak kawsay. In Antología del pensamiento indigenista ecuatoriano sobre sumak kawsay, Hidalgo-Capitán, A. L., Guillén García, A., and Deleg Guazha, N. (eds.): 169–77. Huelva y Cuenca: PYDLOS Ediciones.Google Scholar
Mansilla, H. C. F. (2011) Ideologías oficiales sobre el medio ambiente en Bolivia y sus aspectos problemáticos. Ecuador Debate, 84: 89–106.Google Scholar
McNeill, D. (2007) ‘Human development’: the power of the idea. Journal of Human Development, 8 (1): 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merino, R. (2016) An alternative to ‘alternative development’? Buen Vivir and human development in Andean countries. Oxford Development Studies, 44 (3): 271–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mignolo, W. (2011) The Darker Side of Western Modernity: Global Futures, Decolonial Options. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Monni, S., and Pallottino, M. (2015) A new agenda for international development cooperation: lessons learnt from the Buen Vivir experience. Development, 58 (1): 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murra, J. (2002) El mundo andino: Población, medio ambiente y economía. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, M. (2003) Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics, 9 (2/3): 33–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oosterlaken, I. (2011) Inserting technology in the relational ontology of Sen’s capability approach. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12 (3): 425–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oviedo Freire, A. (2012) El posmoderno buen vivir y el ancestral sumakawsay. In Construyendo el buen vivir, Guillén García, A., and Phelan Casanova, M. (eds.): 49–84. Huelva y Cuenca: PYDLOS Ediciones.Google Scholar
Panzironi, F. (2012) The ‘Indigenous Capability – Right to Health’ and Australia’s ‘Close the Gap’ Indigenous health policy. In The Capability Approach: Development Practice and Public Policy in the Asia-Pacific Region, Panzironi, F., and Gelber, K. (eds.): 68–83. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peter, F. (2003) Gender and the foundations of social choice: the role of situated agency. Feminist Economics, 9 (2/3): 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petras, J., and Veltmeyer, H. (2011) Social Movements in Latin America: Neoliberalism and Popular Resistance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Programa de Pequeñas Donaciones (2012) Nuestro biocorredores para el buen vivir. Quito: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
Radcliffe, S. (2012) Development for a postneoliberal era? Sumak kawsay, living well and the limits to decolonisation in Ecuador. Geoforum, 43 (2): 240–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
República del Ecuador (2008) Constitución de la República del Ecuador. www.gob.ec/sites/default/files/regulations/2020-06/CONSTITUCION%202008.pdf.Google Scholar
Rivera Cusicanqui, S. (1990) Liberal democracy and ayllu democracy in Bolivia: the case of northern Potosí. Journal of Development Studies, 26 (4): 97–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robeyns, I. (2005) The capability approach: a theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6 (1): 93–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robeyns, I. (2008) Sen’s capability approach and feminist concerns. In The Capability Approach: Concepts, Measures and Applications, Comim, F., Qizilbash, M., and Alkire, S. (eds.): 82–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robeyns, I. (2017) Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sangha, K. K., Le Brocque, A., Costanza, R., and Cadet-James, Y. (2015) Application of capability approach to assess the role of ecosystem services in the well-being of Indigenous Australians. Global Ecology and Conservation, 4: 445–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlosberg, D., and Carruthers, D. (2010) Indigenous struggles, environmental justice, and community capabilities. Global Environmental Politics, 10 (4): 12–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholtes, F. (2010) Whose sustainability? Environmental domination and Sen’s capability approach. Oxford Development Studies, 38 (3): 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1977) Rational fools: a critique of the behavioural foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6 (4): 317–44.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2002) Response to commentaries. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37 (2): 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2008) The idea of justice. Journal of Human Development, 9 (3): 331–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2013) The ends and means of sustainability. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14 (1): 6–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2014) Global warming is just one of many environmental threats that demand our attention. The New Republic, 23 August.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K., and Anand, S. (2000) The income component of the Human Development Index. Journal of Human Development, 1 (1): 83–106.Google Scholar
SENPLADES (2009) Plan Nacional para el buen vivir 2009–2013: Construyendo un estado plurinacional e intercultural – versión resumida. Quito: Secretaría Nacional de Planificación y Desarrollo de la República del Ecuador.Google Scholar
SENPLADES (2013) Buen vivir: Plan Nacional 2013–2017. Quito: Secretaría Nacional de Planificación y Desarrollo de la República del Ecuador.Google Scholar
Sousa Santos, B. de (2003) La caída del Angelus Novus: ensayos para una nueva teoría social y una nueva práctica política, vol. 1. Bogotá: ILSA.Google Scholar
Spedding Pallet, A. (2010) ‘Suma qamaña’ ¿kamsañ muni? (¿Qué quiere decir ‘vivir bien’?). Fe y pueblo, 17: 4–39.Google Scholar
Thomson, B. (2011) Pachakuti: indigenous perspectives, buen vivir, sumaq kawsay and degrowth. Development, 54 (4): 448–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNDP (1990b) Defining and measuring human development. In Human Development Report 1990, 9–16. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNDP (2004) Human Development Report 2004: Cultural Liberty in Today’s Diverse World. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
UNDP (2010a) Informe regional sobre desarrollo humano para América latina y el Caribe 2010. San José de Costa Rica: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
UNDP (2010b) Informe nacional sobre desarrollo humano en Bolivia 2010: Los cambios detrás del cambio. La Paz: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
UNDP (2011) Human Development Report 2011: Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future for All. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
UNDP (2012) Ecuador: Economía y finanzas populares y solidarias para el buen vivir. Quito: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
UNDP (2013) Ciudadanía intercultural: Aportes desde la participación política de los pueblos indígenas en Latinoamérica. New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
Untoja Choque, F. (2001) Retorno al ayllu: Una mirada aymara a la globalización. La Paz: Fondo Editorial de los Diputados.Google Scholar
Vanhulst, J., and Beling, A. E. (2014) Buen Vivir: emergent discourse within or beyond sustainable development? Ecological Economics, 101: 54–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vargas Llosa, M. (2004) Palabras de clausura. In Las amenazas a la democracia en América Latina: Terrorismo, neopopulismo y debilidad del estado de derecho, 123–30. Rosario: Editorial Amalevi.Google Scholar
Villalba, U. (2013) Buen Vivir vs development: a paradigm shift in the Andes? Third World Quarterly, 34 (8): 1427–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viola Recasens, A. (2014) Discursos ‘pachamamistas’ versus políticas desarrollistas: el debate sobre el sumak kawsay en los Andes. Íconos, 48: 55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldmüller, J. M. (2014) Human rights indicators as ‘Development 2.0’? Alternautas, 1 (1): 76–88.Google Scholar
Waldmüller, J. M. (2018) Lost through translation: political dialectics of eco-social and collective rights in Ecuador. In Human Rights Transformations in an Unequal World, Merry, S. E., and Destrooper, T. (eds.): 101–27. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Walsh, C. (2010) Development as buen vivir: institutional arrangements and (de)colonial entanglements. Development, 53 (1): 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, C. (2011) Afro and Indigenous life-visions in/and politics: (de)colonial perspectives in Bolivia and Ecuador. Revista de Estudios Bolivianos, 18: 49–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watene, K. (2016) Valuing nature: Māori philosophy and the capability approach. Oxford Development Studies, 44 (3): 287–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watene, K., and Yap, M. (2015) Culture and sustainable development: Indigenous contributions. Journal of Global Ethics, 11 (1): 51–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weismantel, M. (2006) Ayllu: real and imagined communities in the Andes. In The Seductions of Community: Emancipations, Oppressions, Quandaries, Creed, G. (ed.): 77–99. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
Yampara, S. (2004) ¿Desarrollo/progreso o summa qamaña de los ayllus andinos? In Memoria del foro: ¿A dónde vamos? Progreso en diferentes culturas, 81–102. La Paz: Fundación PIEB – GTZ.Google Scholar
Yap, M., and Yu, E. (2016) Operationalising the capability approach: developing culturally relevant indicators of Indigenous wellbeing – an Australian example operationalising the capability approach: developing culturally. Oxford Development Studies, 44 (3): 315–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar